id
int32
0
7.53k
text
stringlengths
0
159k
label
int64
0
19
4,800
So what do we have now, an integral over pain X time? I get to lash you with a wet noodle for ever, but I only get to cut you up with a power saw if I'm quick about it?
14
4,801
Note the difference here. One is saying, if *Christ* disagrees with a Christian being gay, *Christ* can change that. The other is saying, if *I* think being gay is wrong, that a Christian cannot be gay, *I* need to tell them to change. As Lois said, and as before her Paul wrote to the believers in Rome, WHO ARE YOU TO JUDGE ANOTHER'S SERVANT? -jen --
18
4,802
I agree with the body of your post, but please reconsider your phrasing here. I think these ideas are selfish AND rational, which is commendable. Don't give selfishness a bad rap. If we were all selfless there would be no moral reason NOT to have a draft. It [the draft] is the ultimate in mindlessly serving your fellow man with no thought to the importance of the self.
13
4,803
This may sound argumentative, but do the pro-homosexual crowd give the same support to church members that are involved in incestuous relationships? If we do a little substitution above, we get: "although by no means all episcopalians are sympathetic to incestuous men and women, there certainly is a fairly larget percentage (in my experience) who are. I am good friends with an episcopalian minister who is ordained and living in a monogamous incestual relationship. This in no way diminishes his ability to minister -- in fact he has a very significant ministry with the Incest association of his community..." Do the same standards apply? If not, why not? And while we're in the ballpark, what about bestiality? I can't recall offhand if there are any direct statements in the Bible regarding sex with animals; does that activity have more or less a sanction? Please avoid responses such as "you're taking this to extremes". I would guess that a disproportionate percentage of the inerrant Bible community views homosexual acts with distaste in the same manner that society at large views incest. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- Scott Cokely | (714) 833-4760 scott.cokely@nb.rockwell.com "They came for the Davidians, but I did not speak up because I was not a Davidian. Then they came for me..." Opinions expressed are mine and do not represent those of Rockwell. --------------------------------------------------------------------- [ Obviously you can replace homosexuality in the above statement by anything from murder to sleeping late. That doesn't mean that the same people would accept those substitutions. The question is whether the relationships involved do in fact form an appropriate vehicle to represent Christ's relationship to humanity. This is at least *partly* an empirical question. In some cases types of human relationship have been rejected because over time they always seem to lead to trouble. I think that's the case with slavery. One can argue that in theory, if you follow Paul's guidelines, it's possible to have Christian slaveholders. But in practice, over a period of time, most people came to the conclusion that nobody can really have that degree of control over another and not abuse it. The message you were responding to was asking you to look at the results from Christian communities that endorse homosexuality. (Note: Christian homosexuals, not people you see on the news advocating some extremist agenda). You may not want to base your decision completely on that kind of observation, but I would argue that it's at least relevant. You can't answer the request by asking why you shouldn't look at the Incest association, because in fact there is no such association. If there were, it might be reasonable for you to look at it too. Of course that doesn't mean that the results of all such examinations would necessarily come out the same way. Part of why there aren't groups pushing all possible relaxed standards is that some of them do produce obviously bad results.
18
4,804
We are using pkzip V2.04 and I am interested to hear from people who have used one of the many Windows programs that call these. Which ones are available and does any one stand out amongst the rest? Is there a full windows version that does not call the DOS PKZIP/PKUNZIP commands?
17
4,805
Does anyone on this group use this program? It stacks up pretty well to Corel Draw, and since I don't have a CDROM, it was the best buy...
7
4,806
Thanks to Bruce Barnett, who recommended xvttool, and Bernward Averwald and Liam Quin, who recommended modifying .Xdefaults to get the desired behavior for a *class* of xterms. In xvttool, simply create a key file that looks like: "a" "A" "b" "B" "c" "C" ... and specify said key file on the command line. This will translate any input into any other (in my case, lo-case to up-case). Works great, and you get a customizable button-pad on the right or left side. To use an xterm solution, add to your .Xdefaults: capxterm*VT100.Translations: #override \ <Key>a: string("A")\n\ ... or: capxterm.vt100.translations: #override \n\ <Key>a: insert-string(A) \n\ <Key>b: insert-string(B) \n\ ... and invoke as: xterm -name capxterm Thanks loads!
6
4,807
THE diarrhea problem? WHAT diarrhea problem? First, candidal overgrowth is not a frequent problem during antibiotic therapy, and not all cases of antibiotic-related diarrhea have anything to do with candida. But a case of vaginal candidiasis or oral thrush after antibiotic therapy isn't going to surprise anyone either. That's not what people are disagreeing with. Oh, really? Where'd you come up with this? You know, it's really appalling to see you try to comment authoritatively on clinical matters in a bizarre synthesis from reading reports in the literature. Bobbing for citations in the research literature isn't medicine. I hope you're not giving the wrong idea to your medical students.
9
4,808
There are very few disciplines where 100% certainty is necessary to state something as fact. Baseball is not one of them. Therefore I can say that I know Clemens was better than Morris last year, and Larkin was better than Griffin. No, I can't ascertain this. I can't prove it. But I'm not required to do so. And since you obviously feel that such threads are meaningless, why don't you simply stay out of them?
11
4,809
Hello, I've raytraced and rendered and the only difference I've found is that raytracing takes a hell of a lot longer. Am I missing something?
7
4,810
I didn't mean that it would necessarily help him improve at that specific deficiency. I meant that if having Bonds bat behind him gives Williams (possibly unfounded) confidence, that might translate into more hitting productivity. But you're right -- if Williams' biggest problem is more physical than mental, that's less likely to make a difference.
11
4,811
Apologies... Your mail is probably in the pile that arrived just before I got sick about a month ago... A reply will appear eventually... So far, there have been none (unless you count an interview in The Amateur Computerist about the history of netnews, which may be disqualified because TAC's budget doesn't run to reproducing photos...).
12
4,812
The most current orbital elements from the NORAD two-line element sets are carried on the Celestial BBS, (513) 427-0674, and are updated daily (when possible). Documentation and tracking software are also available on this system. As a service to the satellite user community, the most current elements for the current shuttle mission are provided below. The Celestial BBS may be accessed 24 hours/day at 300, 1200, 2400, 4800, or 9600 bps using 8 data bits, 1 stop bit, no parity. Element sets (also updated daily), shuttle elements, and some documentation and software are also available via anonymous ftp from archive.afit.af.mil (129.92.1.66) in the directory pub/space. STS 55 1 22640U 93 27 A 93117.24999999 .00043819 00000-0 13174-3 0 47 2 22640 28.4694 264.3224 0004988 261.3916 194.3250 15.90699957 104
12
4,813
Brad Thone <C09615BT@WUVMD> writes... Yep. If Ed's list is over 45-degrees, the wind's too strong to ride. :-)
0
4,814
... ... I can think of another alternative: 4) OOBE's are a form of contact with the demonic world, whereby one intentionally or unintentionally surrenders control of his or her perceptions to spiritual beings whose purpose is to deceive and entrap them.
18
4,815
(Deletion) Sorry, Gregg, it was no answer to a post of mine. And you are quite fond of using abusing language whenever you think your religion is misrepresented. By the way, I have no trouble telling me apart from Bob Beauchaine. I still wait for your answer to that the Quran allows you to beat your wife into submission. You were quite upset about the claim that it was in it, to be more correct, you said it wasn't. I asked you about what your consequences were in case it would be in the Quran, but you have simply ceased to respond on that thread. Can it be that you have found out in the meantime that it is the Holy Book?
14
4,816
Hello all, I thought you all might like to see this. It's a letter from Jerry Berman to David Chaum from November of 1985, in response to information that Mr. Chaum sent to Mr. Berman. While I have to congratulate EFF for its prompt response to the Clipper Chip announcement from the White House, I think it's important to recognize the philosophy of their Executive Director, as explained below. I agree that legal remedies are important, but when pressed, I'd prefer to retain the ability to use purely technical solutions to preserve my privacy, because they'll hold up under fire. Mr. Chaum has consented to the publication of this letter on the Net. I don't work for, nor am I a member of EFF, ACLU, or any similar organizations, but I do agree with them on a great many things. --Aristophanes ---------- AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION WASHINGTON OFFICE 122 Maryland Avenue, NE November 1, 1985 Washington, DC 20002 -------------------- National Headquarters Mr. David Chaum 132 West 43rd Street Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science New York. NY 10036 P.O. Box 4079 (212) 944-9800 19O9 AB Amsterdam Norman Dorsen President Dear Mr. Chaum: Ira Glasser Executive Director Eleanor Holmes Norton CHAIR National Advisory Council Thank you for sending me a most interesting article. A society of individuals and organizations that would expend the time and resources to use a series of 'digital pseudonyms' to avoid data linkage does not in my opinion make big brother obsolete but acts on the assumption that big brother is ever present. I view your system as a form of societal paranoia. As a matter of principle, we are working to enact formal legal protections for individual privacy rather than relying on technical solutions. We want to assume a society of law which respects legal limits rather than a society that will disobey the law, requiring citizens to depend on technical solutions. e.g. require a judical warrant for government interception of data communications rather than encrypt all messages on the assumption that regardless of the lawt the government will abuse its power and invade privacy. As a matter of practicality, I do not think your system offers much hope for privacy. First, the trend toward universal identifiers is as much.-a movement generated by government or industry's desire to keep track of all citizens as it is by citizens seeking simplicity and convenience in all transactions. At best, your system would benefit the sophisticated and most would opt for simplicity. The poor and the undereducated would never use or benefit from it. Finally where there's a will, there's a way. If government wants to link data bases, it will, by law, require the disclosure of various individual pseudonyms used by citizens or prohibit it for data bases which the government wants to link. Since corporations make money by trading commercial lists with one another, they will never adopt the system or if it is adopted, will use "fine printn contracts to permit selling various codes used by their customers to other firms. The solution remains law, policy, and consensus about limits on government or corporate intrusion into areas of individual autonomy. Technique can be used to enforce that consensus or to override it. It cannot be used as a substitute for such consensus. Sincerely Yours, /Sig/ Jerry J. Berman Chief Legislative Counsel & Direrector ACLU Privacy Technology Project
3
4,817
BMWs boxer twin! (no two wheelers here?) Been around since 1923. I think the other examples are Johnny come latelies... I may be wrong so no flames please..
4
4,818
No smiley on the part about atheism, I see. Do you realize that your statement says that I was mentioning "nonsense" about atheism? This is hard for me to defend against if this is the claim you are making, as you have only included the last two sentences of my post and mentioned the first. Please address the substance of my post rather than rejecting it out of hand. But, because of the sometimes ambiguous nature of English, I may be misinterpreting your wording here. Please clarify: did you or did you not mean to call my statements about atheism "nonsense"? If so, care to back up that claim? OK, then. Start up the amatuer psycology again. How am I "broken"? *YAWN* Excuse me, I don't recall any portion of my post in which I called Christians arrogant quote me, if I did. I do remember calling Christianity "silly" and then following that up with information that I was nine years old when I thought that. I also said that I find faith to be intellectually dishonest and I would like to see some sort of proof of your god's existence. I define "faith" as "belief in the absense of any proof", BTW. Also, I subscribe to a.a as I mentioned and we see fundies of all types there, so in answer to your question: "no." Finally, I'd hardly call Christianity "beseiged" in this country. I seldom see Christians ridiculed for merely practising their religion or wearing crosses or having Christian bumper stickers. I don't know for sure, of course, I only say I haven't seen it happening. What I have seen happening is my homosexual and/or friends being beat up, or preached at by people who claim to be Christ's followers. I know that this sort of thing isn't practiced by the majority of Christians, but it is a very vocal minority who are doing it and I don't see comperable victimization of Christians. The implication being that I am not self-respecting, of course. I'm not a student of psychology, BTW, but I am a student of Creative Writing and Linguistics, so literary analysis _is_ my forte. Also, if the implications I see are improper, please let me know. I'm here because I'm not sequestered in my own little atheist cubbyhole as you seem to think atheists should be. Did it occur to you that I _don't_ think I know everything and that maybe someone will say something that will change my life? Have you read my other posts here or did you see "atheist" and decide it was time to poke at someone who doesn't deserve your respect? Aw, geez. I'm sorry, I probably am getting my back up a little too high, here. It's just that the "nonsense" thing really annoys me. I figure you should see my first reactions, though, since they are my true reactions to your question. Now, the smoothed feather version: I seek all sorts of knowledge. That's why I came to my university. Yes, I am looking at your religion (well, sorta, I have no idea what *kind* of Christian you are) from the outside, and hopefully with an objective view. I've been trying to ask reasoned questions here, because I genuinely don't know the answers to them, but when I saw the question directed at atheists I figured I would answer. After all, you can speculate about atheist motives here all you want (hence the "amatuer" psychology crack), but without an atheist, you can't be sure of even one atheist's motive. I'm hoping people really want to know and I was trying to show that I actually checked out several religions and I actually read all the pamphlets people have to offer and I actually think about these things. Instead, I'm still faced with the implication that atheism is some kind of aberration and that only "broken" people are atheist. Try it from the flip side: I posit that atheism is the natural state and only broken people are theists. I offer as proof that so many people witness from horrible lives which picked up as soon as they discovered their religion, that religion is regional (if people didn't follow the religion of their areas, there would be a more homogenous mix), so many terrorists claim theistic motives, and that theists tend to be so pushy and angry when challenged on alt.atheism. Why are religions so successful? Because there is so much suffering in the world, which "breaks" people. It's an uncomfortable situation whichever way you look at it, which is another reason I'm here, to try to see the flip side of my thinking (and also as a watchdog for logical fallacies :). ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The implication here being that atheists can't possibly know anything about Christianity. Probably jumping at shadows again, but I think my reaction is somewhat justified. After all, the first post suggested that atheists are "broken", hostile people. This post confirms that someone else believes it. ^^^^^^^^^^ Well, he got me there. I am a strong atheist, because I feel that lack of evidence, especially about something like an omnipotent being, implies lack of existence. However, I haven't met the strong atheist yet who said that nothing could ever persuade him. Call me a "seeker" if you like, I don't. _Weak_ atheism is being ignore here, though. Some atheists simply say "I don't believe in any god" rather than my position: "I believe that no god(s) exist." For the weak atheist, the is no atheism to disbelieve, because they don't actively believe in atheism. (If you think this is confusing, try figuring out the difference between Protestants and Methodists from an atheist point of view :). This is another fallacy many theists seem to have, that everyone believes in something (followed up by "everyone has faith in something"). Guess what? My atheism ends the moment I'm shown a proof of some god's existence. Is that really too much to ask? Well, I guess you won't succeed in converting him or me. Why the supposition that you will fail to convince him? (amatuer psycology on) Is it because you yourself are unconvinced? :) And I told you that I find faith to be intellectually dishonest. Note that I can only speak for myself. If you find faith to be honest, show me how. I have been unable to reconcile it so far. Maybe that's how I'm "broken"? I tell you that I have invisible fairies living in my garden and that you should just take my word for it. If you accept that, you are of a fundamentally different mind than I and I really would like to know how you think. All I ask for is proof of the assertion "God exists". Logical or physical proofs only, please. Then we'll discuss the nature of "God". Prayer?! Uh, oh, we'll have to revoke his atheist club card and beanie! :) Good luck to you, as well. And, again, I apologize if the inferences I made were inaccurate. Muppets and garlic toast forever, Max (Bob) Muir
18
4,819
And this results in a fire that starts in one room and torches the entire place before anyone in the adjacent rooms can escape? I don't think so. So much for the smolder theory.
13
4,820
In case anyone was wondering about upgrading their 386 or 486 class machine without spending a lot of money, I looked into replacing the processor on those machines and here are the facts (as I understand them). If you have a PS/2 Model 70 or Model 80, you can replace the i386 chip with either 1) a Cyrix 486DLC chip for $130 which will increase your processing power by about 60% for normal fuctions, and not at all for math functions. This chip will only run at your original clock speed, ie. if you have a 16MHz machine the Cyrix 486DLC will run at 16MHz. note: Windows does not use the math functions, so it is a good upgrade if you are running Windows. Or, 2) you can get a Kingston 486/NOW platform for $450 with a 25MHz i486SX on it which will increase your normal processing power by about 100%, if you were running at 25MHz originally. But again it will not increase the speed of your math fuctions. I think that it will continue to run at 25MHz even if your original processor runs at a slower speed. There is also 3) the Kingston 486/NOW platform for $750 with a 33MHz i486DX on it. This might speed up your math functions as well, but I am not sure. If you have a PS/2 Model 70 B21 or other PS/2 machine with either an i486SX or a non-clock doubling i486DX (ie. it runs at either 25 or 33MHz) in it, then you can get an Intel Overdrive chip (which is really an i486DX2 chip) and replace your chip with it. You should get about 95% better preformance for both normal and math functions. The 25/50 Mhz version of the Overdrive chip costs $450 and the 33/66MHz version costs $700. The replacement for the 25MHz 486SX chip is an espeacially good deal as it provides the math coprocessor which the 486SX does not have. Note that the speed ratings on the Overdrive chips are the maximum speed at which they can run. If you have a 20MHz 486SX, then the Overdrive chip will run at 20/40MHz, ie. 20MHz externally and 40MHz internally. There is no reason to buy an Overdrive chip which is rated at faster then your machine, you will not get faster performance. You should be able to buy these chips from any of the microchip merchants that advertise at the back of PC Magazine or PC Week. You might want to shop around as prices do vary. If you need a name/phone number for a source for a particular chip, e-mail me, and I will respond with a couple of sources. Lawrence Khoo
5
4,821
Please Help if you can. Whenever I try to run windows useing the 16 million color mode with the drivers supplyed with my Diamond Stelth 24x It will lock up requireing a full system reset to break out. The drivers that I have for windows are V.1.00 for windows 3.1 (which IS the version of windows I am useing) My Setup --------- 386DX40 128KCach 4 Megs of ram 14" SVGA touch Monitor non-interlaced AMI Bios Any and all help would be apreciated, The card seems to work fine in other modes, I usually run windows in 800x600 mode and probs at all, so I am hopeing it is a driver and not a card problem.
17
4,822
I would like to hear from people who are thinking of going to the Urbana 93 conference in December this year. I have recently received info from IFES (International Fellowship of Evangelical Students) and am thinking about attending although I am still not sure whether I can afford it. I would also like to hear from people involved in IFES or IVF groups just to hear how things are going on your campus. Are there any news groups or groups of people who already do this. I am involved in the Christian Fellowship at the University of Technology Sydney in Australia. If you are interested to find out how we are going mail me to find out.
18
4,823
The subject says it all. I'm wondering if anyone on the net has had any experiences with Cornell Computer Systems of California. I was checking out their ad in Computer Shopper, and they seem to have a good balance between service, price, and hardware. The question is -- are they reliable? E-mail responses would be appreciated.
5
4,824
It works for me. I've run Motif 1.1.3,1.1.4,1.1.5,1.2,1.2.1, and 1.2.2 on an X11R5 server with MotifBC defined.
6
4,825
I have some articles available on the Church and gay people, from a pro-gay viewpoint, which might interest some of the people participating in this thread. Please email me if you would like to have me send them to you (warning, about 70k worth of material. Make sure you have mailbox and/or disk space available.) There are no short answers to the questions we've been seeing here ("how do you explain these verses?", "How do you justify your actions?") If you've been asking and you really want an idea of the other people's thinking, I encourage you to do some serious reading. --
18
4,826
I have ordered many times from Competition accesories and ussually get 2-3 day delivery. Once they had to backorder something, but they sent me a card to say it would be two weeks. Came in 10 days or so. Always be satisfied, with CA and in life.
0
4,827
Is this not the same movie that sold at McDonald's for $7.99?? (new)?
1
4,828
But the sperm would be very diluted in a "x" gallon swimming pool
9
4,829
We were at a dealership today looking at buying a car and the salesman was showing us something he was calling a "buy back". Is that a car that was fleeted and then given back for the new model the next year? If that is so, how many miles is a good number to have on it and are these types of cars generally a good buy?
4
4,830
People *die* of natural causes, too. We hear all this bellyaching over things like murder and war while Mother Nature is killing people all of the time. In fact, more people die of natural causes than due to the conscious actions of other people. So, what's a few murders here and there? --
13
4,831
[Note: This is a repost of my earlier response to Mr. Starr, which was not properly formatted. Apologies to those who've seen the following before:] To explain my position on the "War On Drugs," I offer this: Drugs And Crime: A New Approach by Ken Barnes Given that: 1. The trade in illegal drugs is responsible for much of the crime which afflicts our nation. 2. People who want drugs (particularly people who are predisposed to addiction) will find a way to get them, whether or not they are legally available. 3. Despite current law enforcement efforts, drugs are readily available to those who want them. 4. Addiction to drugs, both legal and illegal, is responsible for a significant drain on the productive resources of our country, and this occurs in a variety of ways, from the cocaine-addicted babies who are unable to learn, to the spread of disease among addicts, to the tragic consequences of alcohol abuse and tobacco smoking. 5. A general economic principle of government is that whatever is subsidized you get more of, and whatever is taxed you get less of. To be most effective in confronting the nation's drug problem, some way must be found to utilize these additional powers of government to make drug dealing and drug use less attractive. While this country's current efforts to combat legal drugs have succeeded in some respects, (there is a greater awareness of the health consequences of smoking, and designated-driver programs have helped reduce drunk driving, for example), the same cannot be said for the "war" on illegal drugs. There remains a core group of illegal drug users which support international networks of smugglers, pushers, growers, processors, kingpins, and gangsters. These networks and their "marketing activities," which include drive- by shootings, corrupting law enforcement authorities, and smuggling weapons, are directly or indirectly responsible for a large proportion of the crimes committed in our country every day. Clearly, illegal drugs and rising crime are linked. It takes only a moment's reflection to recognize how they are linked. The link is money. As with this country's failed effort to prohibit alcohol consumption, a black market has been created, in which greedy local monopolies, like the gangsters of a bygone era, have profited enormously from their illegal trade. The victims of this trade include not only the innocent people unfortunate enough to be caught in the crossfire, but, I would argue, the drug users themselves. Were it not for the black market, and the violent monopoly of the drug lords, drug users might not be the thieves, robbers, prostitutes and murderers they have become in order to pay the high prices the drug lords demand. In the absence of the drug lords, most would be, I believe, simply people with a problem, either a moral problem_or_a medical problem, but_not_a criminal problem. Let me be clear however, I am_not_advocating that we let the criminals who have been preying on our society for these many years of Prohibition off the hook. On the contrary, the new approach I advocate is one which would not result in either the government or private industry getting into the business of promoting crack cocaine, or any other presently illegal drug for that matter. Neither is it an approach which sees law abiding citizens handing over more and more of their freedom and privacy in an effort to track down illegal drug users, until "the land of the free and the home of the brave" looks like a police state. Here then is my proposal: 1. Possession and use of all presently illegal drugs is decriminalized, but buying and selling them remains illegal. 'Potheads' can grow their own marijuana (as many already do today), other drug users can legally import their poison of choice as long as they pay the tariffs, and a barter economy of drug experimenters develops. 2. Because of the barter economy which supplies the drug users, the black market profits that have so enriched the drug lords dwindle. If these drugs can be obtained for 'free' or next to nothing, why buy them? Nevertheless, there will be those who will seek to sell these "noncommercial" drugs even at relatively low prices. Therefore, 3. Law enforcement activity is concentrated on those individuals who continue to buy and sell, and also on the crimes committed by drug users too poor to afford even low prices. But here is where the strategy begins to differentiate between the drug dealers, the victimizers, and the drug users, their victims. 4. Upon arrest for_any_crime,_suspects are permitted to choose whether or not they will undergo a drug test. Those who choose to cooperate are informed that upon conviction for the crime they are accused of, if they are found to be a drug user, they will be institutionalized until they are clean, and only then will they begin to serve their sentence. If they choose to cooperate and are already drug-free, they can begin to serve their sentence right away. Those who choose not to undergo the drug test and are convicted face stiffer fines and serve longer sentences. 5. Institutionalization of drug using criminals serves several purposes: Drug using criminals (and this includes drunk and/or 'stoned' drivers) are separated from their sources of supply, thus reducing the total number of drug users in society at large, and consequently decreasing the demand for drugs on the street, putting more of the remaining drug dealers out of business. Institutionalization provides an incentive for drug using criminals to straighten themselves out, before becoming part of the general prison population. While helping protect society from crime, institutionalization could also serve to deter drug users from becoming criminals, since drug using criminals, unlike other criminals, would be delayed prior to serving their sentences by the additional time it takes for them to sober up. Institutionalization of drug using criminals separate from the general prison population would also provide a closely monitored pool of addicts who could volunteer for research studies of new techniques and treatments for addictive disease, with the potential to benefit both themselves and others. 6. Dealers in illegal drugs are generally not drug users themselves, and this is particularly true of the drug bosses or kingpins running large illicit organizations. Under this proposal, dealers would be more readily identifiable, since upon arrest they would presumably pass the drug test, or else decline to take it in order to avoid having to explain why they are in possession of drugs when it is apparent they do not use them. Declining to take the test, they would of course face stiffer penalties. While each case of attempted sale of a noncommercial drug would have to stand on own its merits, the outcome of a suspect's drug test could provide additional evidence for the prosecution. 7. Just as cigarette taxes have contributed to the decline of smoking in our country by making cigarettes more costly while at the same time providing revenue for anti-smoking campaigns, noncommercial drugs should be taxed, and the money generated should be used to combat their use. Enforcement of this tax should be on a voluntary basis however, and should not be used as an excuse to infringe on the rights and privacy of noncommercial drug users, since to do so would have the effect of reintroducing Prohibition. Instead, drug users will be encouraged to pay the tax by reminding them that if untaxed drugs are ever found in their possession during the course of routine police operations, they will be required to pay the tax immediately or else forfeit their untaxed drugs to be destroyed. If drug dealers are found to be selling noncommercial drugs on which taxes have not been paid, they will face additional prosecution for evading the tax. The strategy of adding tax evasion to drug dealing charges is already in use in some jurisdictions, but its effectiveness is currently limited by the illegality of drug possession. Revenue from drug possession taxes and import tariffs would be used to fund anti-drug advertising campaigns, and provide support to private sector drug treatment programs for those unable to afford treatment. 8. Taxpayer subsidies to all drug producers must be ended. Federal support of tobacco farming is both immoral and wasteful in this era of tight budgets, and the marijuana crops grown illicitly on federal lands in many states must likewise be eliminated. While my proposal would have the effect of permitting the use of what are now illegal drugs, it would hold the users of all drugs responsible for their actions, and I believe, would reduce the harm drugs have on our society, particularly the crime caused by the illegal drug trade. So long as we remain a free nation, with relatively porous borders, and freedom for our citizens to travel, we will always have a drug problem. Whether it takes the form of heroin addicts dying in abandoned buildings, drunk drivers killing and maiming others on our streets, or emphysema patients struggling for breath after a lifetime of smoking, the results are the same: needless suffering and death. As a society we must recognize that while our society permits us to harm ourselves with drugs, as we are already doing (regardless of the drug laws), we must take a stand against the harm that drugs and drug users cause to others. We must particularly oppose the vicious and violent cartels which prey on the weakness of drug users. By taking the profits out of their deadly trade, my proposal goes a long way towards shutting down these powerful criminal organizations. The question of whether drug use is a moral or medical problem depends on which group of drug users you're talking about. Different drugs have different effects, and some are more addictive than others. The addictiveness of a drug also often varies between individuals, and so we have some people who can drink alcohol in moderation, while others find they cannot resist the bottle. Nicotine, which former Surgeon General C. Everett Koop declared to be as addicting as heroin, is a legal drug with known harmful effects, and while some people can stop smoking by willpower alone, others continue to smoke even after treatment for lung cancer. For those individuals who can stop taking drugs on their own, we may argue that because they have chosen to use them, this represents a moral failure on their part, or an unwillingness to face the difficulties of life. But for the addicts, while they may have chosen to use drugs the first time, by the time they discover their addiction it is too late. We cannot hold them responsible for their disease, any more than we would blame someone who is drowning for an inability to swim. Perhaps they should have known not to go near the water, or perhaps someone should have warned them of the danger, but in their present circumstances warnings will not help. Neither does it help for the drug dealers on the shore to be tossing them weights.
13
4,832
Save youself the cash. Take it from a BMW mechanic. Idiot lights are for just that. Buy yourself a ballpoint pen and write it down yourself. Change your oil every 3000 mi. and you will be just fine.
4
4,833
How about some sources for all these numbers? Or is this more stuff that "everybody knows"?
0
4,834
I'm familiar with the telethon situation (an individual on CompuServe was also victimized and was equally pissed). That was a local television station contract which could not be broken. For that item, I strongly suggest you call that affiliate and vent your anger on them. (Supposedly one station had told my friend that they have received hundreds of angry calls which will translate into far less incentive to pre-empt hockey telecasts in future. The contract was written when the pathetic WLAF was in that time slot.)
16
4,835
Laser printers often emit ozone (which smells sort of like Clorox). Adequate ventilation is recommended.
9
4,836
agents of The original poster did not say why his mother had been in hospital but I can answer a few general points. Elderly patients may exhibit a marked difficulty in coping after being in hospital for a few days. The drastic change of environment will often unmask how marginally they have been coping at home. Even young people find the change unsettling. Though we have thought that this decrement in function after - say - anaesthesia and surgery for a fractured hip (a common event in the elderly) was due to anaesthesia there is good evidence that the change of situation is much more important. Some hospitals have tried a 'rapid transit' system for hip fractures, aiming to have the patient back at home within 24 hours of admission. The selection of the anaesthetic has no effect on the ability to discharge these patients early. Anaesthetists who work with the elderly (which is almost all of us) generally take care to tailor the choice and dose of drugs used to the individual patient. Even so, there is some evidence that full mental recovery may take a surprisingly long time to return. This is the sort of thing which is detected by setting quite difficult tasks, not the gross change that the original poster noted. Haloperidol (Haldol TM) is a long acting drug. The plasma half life of the drug is up to 35 hours. If the decanoate (a sort of slow release formulation) is used it may be weeks. The elderly are sensitive to haloperidol for a number of reasons. Without knowing more it is hard to comment.
9
4,837
Hi folks, I'm doing an animated film on new methodes in loom research (You know, the thing they make cloth with.) and need a model of a loom. The format should be in ascii faceted geometry and fairly straight forward to figure out. Any help or pointers would be greatly appreciated. -Thanks Rick Boykin ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Rick Boykin (rboykin@cscsparc.larc.nasa.gov) Computer Sciences Corporation, Hampton, VA. "So maybe I could be a fly and feed arachnid as I die" -Tom Marshall
7
4,838
writes... Oh, probably. Ms. Nichols has given the average game times (and average runs scored) for 1983 and 1992. (A very nice piece of information, Ms. Nichols. Who knows? She may be listening, and not have me in her kill file after all.) Those numbers indicate somewhere in the neighborhood of half-a-run *less* being scored per game, and the games taking 15 minutes *longer*. Something is being done now that wasn't done ten years ago, which is extending the games by 15 minutes. Ms. Nichols thinks it's more pitches. Given the increasing specialization of pitchers, it wouldn't surprise me. If it's not simply more pitches, though, I don't think it's unreasonable to think that something can be done to get ten of those minutes back. Then I get a couple more from shortening the warmup time for a relief pitcher after he comes in, and a couple more still from enforcing existing rules, which have been stated in other posts in this thread (and other related ones). The problem is, who decides whether that time is "wasted?" You don't seem to think it is at all. Right now, I think it is, although I have heard one case favoring giving the reliever all the warmups he thinks he needs (the difference in mounds between the field and pen) -- but who knows? If the rules get changed, maybe something I didn't foresee will happen to change my mind. But you can bet a lot of minds would fail to foresee the same thing, or else nothing will be changed. RG
11
4,839
When it's too windy to stand. When you're on the road in high winds, stay alert. Even more alert than your "alert 'cause you're on a motorcycle and they're out to kill you" kind of alert. Be aware of the terrain, and how it may funnel wind in sudden gusts (well, not gusts to somebody standing there, but it's gusty 'cause you ride through it). If you are riding in a steady crosswind, be aware of a hill that will block the wind, and adjust your lean angle. Be aware of passing trucks to your windward side, your lean angle will change dramatically both as you enter and as you leave their turbulance cone. Reducing your profile may help, ie, lean on the gas tank and kiss the triple clamp. Keep a nimble hand on the steering, be ready to countersteer into and out of sudden wind bursts. Keep a larger than usual buffer zone, both ahead and behind, and to the side, you can easily be blown half a lane over before you can react by countersteering. Keep a close eye on traffic in your mirror, if someone is coming up wanting to pass, get out of their way early. Stop often for short brakes, extensive riding in high winds is both mentally and physically fatiguing.
0
4,840
Has anyone successfully programmed this beast using the bootloader pgm with the circuit described in `the little green handbook, pg 9-1`? Dan. -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Adrian Blockley ! I may say something profound Environmental science ! here one day. Murdoch University ! Western Australia, 6153 ! blockley@essun1.murdoch.edu.au ! phone 09-360 2737 !
15
4,841
If ESPN pisses you off, call them - they do respond to calls. Last night I called when they said they were cutting to baseball and we couldn't see the sudden-death overtime for the BUffalo game. Apparently they received enough calls so they waited for the overtime to finish before cutting away. Their phone number is 203-585-2000
16
4,842
-- That means that there cannot be any atheists since there is NO WAY that you can prove that there is no god. Atheists are people who BELIEVE that there is no god, most not only believe, but also are damn sure that there isn't a god (like me). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cursor, aka Nick Humphries, u2nmh@csc.liv.ac.uk, at your service. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- "What's the use of computers? They'll never play | "Why pay money to see chess, draw art or make music." - Jean Genet. | bad films? Stay home "Intelligence isn't to make no mistakes, but how | and see bad TV for to make them look good." - Bertolt Brecht. | free." - Sam Goldwyn.
9
4,843
I see no other way of interpreting them other than homosexuyality being wrong. Please tell me how these verses can be interpreted in any other way. I read them and the surrounding text.
18
4,844
Maybe you had accidentally sealed in some water? I cleaned my chain thoroughly, took it on a short ride to dry it off and heat it up a bit, and the paraffin sank deep into the rollers and formed a good seal on the outside. No rust, but then again I live in Tucson!
0
4,845
That's pretty good. A friend had an Audi that he named Murphy.
4
4,846
How about the name and number of the pin place. I would think that 115 or so people calling to bitch about why orders placed after ours are getting done first might speed things along. Dean
0
4,847
Does any one know where I can get a telecaption decoder module? Need it to build a close caption decoder. Thanks. Wayne
15
4,848
I'm looking for any and all information regarding packet radio implementation on the PC. Software, hardware, whatever. Please e-mail any info to koberg@spot.colorado.edu.
15
4,849
Thank you. I now know at least that though I may be on drugs, at least I'm not the only one. Yes, this took some getting used to -- of course not having an Indian connection, no knowledge of hindi, etc., this was not trivial for me. I did have, thanks to the wonders of the net, "A Glossary to *Satanic Verses*", posted to rec.arts.books by Vijay Raghavan, which explains a lot of the Indian English constructions, Indian culture references, even the Islamic references ("Jahilia", "Submission", the context of the Satanic Verses incident, etc.) -- what I have only covers the first couple of hundred pages, but it helped me get into the flow of the novel [I can mail this to anyone interested; if anyone has portions after part I, if they exist, I'd like to get those].
14
4,850
Well, we already suffer from street hoardings. If you don't watch TV, you are free of commercials there, but if you want to go from A to B you cannot escape beer ads. I think the right time to stop this proposal is now. If this idea goes through, it's the thin end of the wedge. Soon companies will be doing larger, and more permanant, billboards in the sky. I wouldn't want a world a few decades from now when the sky looks like Las Vegas. That would _really_ make me sad. Coca Cola company will want to paint the moon red and white. (Well, if not this moon, then a moon of Jupiter). Microscum will want to name a galaxy `Microscum Galaxy'. Where do we draw the line? Historically mankind is not very good at drawing fine lines. I'm normally extremely enthusiastic about all forms of resource allocation for space research; I think it's the most important investment possible for mankind in the long run. But this is not the way to get the money. -ans.
12
4,851
We're having to associate with you against our will. This is fascism! You don't have to associate with anyone against your will. Go live in a cave. We won't miss you. Drewcifer
13
4,852
Playmation is available direct from Anjon & Associates for $299. It's hard to beat that price. Also, you'd be better off with a newer version than an older version that had bugs that have long since been clobbered.
7
4,853
That's fascinating. I heard that the Chinese, rather than the Italians, invented pasta.
14
4,854
3
4,855
I would like to know as well, since I just bought a 200MB Seagate IDE drive and want to add it to my computer (a four-year-old Gateway 386/20), which currently has an 80MB Seagate SCSI drive. The SCSI controller is such that the docs told me not to specify it in the CMOS setup, i.e. both hard drive settings are listed as "Not installed," and apparently the SCSI controller works its wonders. I wondering if this is a problem. Also, I remember how, when I helped my cousin install his second IDE drive, we had to define a master/slave relationship for them; do I need to do something similar here? Same here. Any help would be appreciated, since I intend to install this drive ASAP; I'd like to know what to do (and what not to do) before I start. Thanks! --
5
4,856
# # Actually, I was rather surprised to see an article on this subject # # (i.e. the "new, inproved" survey saying that roughly 1% of men are gay) # # on the front page of The New York _Times_ recently (I think it was # # on Thurs, 15 April). The headline was something to the effect of # # "New Survey Finds 1% of Men Are Gay" # # Does anyone else see the difference between "1% of Men Are Gay" and 1% # of Men surveyed *say* they are gay? Does the NY Times think that # there is no one "in the closet"? I see. When survey after survey show 1-4%, we are supposed to believe ONE survey, done with very poor assumptions, with a very atypical population, 40 years ago when the society was FAR more repressed about homosexuality than it is now. Yeah, right. # Russ Anderson | Disclaimer: Any statements are my own and do not reflect
13
4,857
Has anybody ever heard of Hawk EISA/VLB motherboards? NET Computers International (from Computer Shopper) has the 486/33 version w/256k cache for $559. I'm trying to decide between this motherboard and the NICE motherboard. Thanks! PS: The Hawk motherboard has 3 EISA slots, two of which are VLB. The spec sounds identical to the Nice.
5
4,858
What string did you use to do this?
5
4,859
[...stuff deleted...] Thank you. I thought I was in the twilight zone for a moment. It still amazes me that many people with science backgrounds still confuse the models and observables with what even they would call the real world. -jim halat
14
4,860
I assume that can only be guessed at by the assumed energy of the event and the 1/r^2 law. So, if the 1/r^2 law is incorrect (assume some unknown material [dark matter??] inhibits Gamma Ray propagation), could it be possible that we are actually seeing much less energetic events happening much closer to us? The even distribution could be caused by the characteristic propagation distance of gamma rays being shorter then 1/2 the thickness of the disk of the galaxy.
12
4,861
21 Apr 1993 10:28:02 Gillian E Runcie Writes: Dear Gillian That is such a wickedly cool idea; why didn't I think of it??? However, here in Canada the aerials (antenna) are usually near the driver or passenger areas and I would surely be seen......but I'll give it a try anyway. Thanks for the first truely useable piece of information I have heard in a long time (and you are by no means a mere female, as this way at getting back takes real guts to do).
0
4,862
Recently we have found TIFF manipulation packages which do not recognize TIFF files output by xv. This is due to a missing XRESOLUTION and YRESOLUTION tag which apparently is required (or at least believed to be required) for valid TIFF. I have checked both xv 2.x and xv 3.x and neither of these do indeed copy these tags. Has anyone out there hacked in the fixes for xv to support these tags? I have been told that I could find some code in tiff/tools/tiffcp.c, but that directory is one of many of the tiff group not distributed with xv. I hope to obtain the original tiff src and look at it, but would prefer to find code already known to work in xv.
7
4,863
While the 64K limit may not be _necessary_ limitation, they probably fall within the category of 'reasonable' limitations. If you find yourself trying to allocate an edit control for more than 64K of text, it's probably time take a good look at your program's design. In what way is 8192 a 'small' number? It seems to me that you'd hit the wall in many other ways before you'd hit the systemwide limit on global handles, unless, of course, you're abusing GlobalAlloc. And _please_ don't try to tell me that it's impossible to abuse the resources available under other operating systems. All systems have limits. The question is whether or not the limits are _reasonable_. So far, you haven't offered a single argument which suggests that Windows' limits are any less reasonable than limits in other systems. -- Rick Schaut UUCP:...{uunet | uw-beaver}!microsoft!richs
17
4,864
From the Pluto Fast Flyby Instrument definition research anouncemnet, the instrument payload constraints are: Mass allocation - 7 kilograms (15.4 lbs) Power allocation - 6 watts Required instruments: Visible imaging system (1024x1024 CCD, 750 mm fl, f/10 optics) IR mapping spectrometer (256x256 HgCdTe array, 0.3% energy resolution) UV spectrometer (55-200 nm, 0.5 nm resolution) Radio science (ultrastable oscilator incorporated in telecom system) ultrastable means 10^-14. This doesn't leave much room for payloads which are totally unrelated to the mission of the spacecraft. In addition, the power will come from a radioisotope thermal generator, and the whole space craft will be about 2 feet in diameter, with no booms, which means there will be strong gamma-lines from Pu-239 and associated schmutz in the background, which tends to reduce sensitivity somewhat. It would still be nice, and our group here at Goddard is looking in to it.
12
4,865
Nah, let's reserve rec.sports.idiots for people who POST obvious flamebait, like yourself. If someone posts something as controversial (not to mention idiotic) as what Austin posted in a widely accessed newsgroup, someone should challenge the statement. There is a school of thought that suggests that silence = consent. Whereas this idea may not apply to everything in life, it certainly SHOULD apply to a forum of public discussion, which r.s.b. is. If you've been reading r.s.b. lately, you'll find that even elementary school children have had access to our postings, alibet in an edited form. It's making me think a little more carefully about some of the things I post. In conclusion, if someone like Austin wants to post his drivel in some obscure newsgroup that I don't read, fine. He's got the right to rant, rave, and drool all he wants to in the name of free speech. But if he drools in a newsgroup that I read, then I will support the right of anyone to provide rebuttal to his drooling. Now, of course, you don't have to read any of this. And if you want to cut down on flames, then DON'T POST FLAMEBAIT! (You don't have to respond to flames, either. Saves cyberspace)
11
4,866
I am looking for a text/reference that will include pinouts, description, and functionality for just about any IC made. Does such a text exist? Are there docs on the Internet that reference IC's? It would be a great idea if each major IC manufacturer made available to the public an anonymous FTP site with all it's data books in the form of text files. (ala RFC style). This would save time and money for the IC manufacturer since a text file costs nothing to send around the world via internet and since most users of IC's are found in the internet anyway. Are there any books available for purchase that reference (as many as possible)? Or am I going to be stuck obtaining a zillion databooks from the manufacturers (those little phonebook-type books that are obsoleted every couple years)
15
4,867
As opposed to Universal or Catholic or "FourSquare Gosple". I think that the Greek Orthodox Church would take high offense at your misuse of the word. Your version of Christianity is neither mainstream nor bible derived you make claims of bible-centricity that are not derivable soley from the Bible. About six-seven months ago, you claimed that your primary objection to the LDS was that "our" doctrine was not bible-derived, And now this (and other) claims can be shown, are also not bible interpeting bible. Simple truths... oh for example? "paradise exalted to heaven" paradise wasn't equal to heaven and _now_ it is? Yet you claim that peeple can not be exalted to heaven, nicht wahr? When I read the story, I found that "Abraham's Bosom" wasn't so much a place, but somewhere the rich man could see and talk to Abraham? Gee this is fairly close to what the LDS call spirit prison, and what you have called false doctrine... [ vers deleted reproduced below quoted from the SunSpot Gopher Archive ] This part is _not_ supported from scripture, nor does it support your claim that the "paradise" where Christ descended was exalted. Making such claims on this little "evidence" ignores the witness of the scripture Using this to argue that paradise or spirit prison, is now changed from a Pre-Easter postion to post-easter by God postion is not supportable. Makeing such a claim requires more evidence than you have given here... Yes, and your reasons are in general not supported by any direct reading of the scriptures. You have demonstrated that you claims to scriptural "proof" need to be cross-checked. The referencs that you supply often do not support your postion, if they are read in the context of the scripture. How about that those who have been in paradise, and have accepted the gosple will be judged of Jesus Christ, and then return to the presence of God. Is that somehow different from your expressed view that the paradise spoken of (or "Abraham's Bosom") Should we go back and discuss your view on why the Angle of the Lord is the Lord again... ;-)
8
4,868
Joachim Martillo writes If you were to substitute the word "Jew"/"Jewish" in this posting where you see the word "Muslim"/"Islamic", switch Joachim and Mohammed's names around, and then repost this, you would get a flood of messages attacking the author as an anti-semite. And rightly so. The author of this crap is a racist, pure and simple. He obviously has no qualms about being open with it, either, unlike some other Arab- and Mulsim-bashers on the Net. Now, I for one, am not going to look at Joachim's posting and infer from it that all Jews think this way. Sure, there might be some, but this view is not a part of Judaism, and it is stupid to believe that all Jews' minds are this twisted. However, some Muslims might look at Joachim's flame as a reaffirmation of their worst fears about Jews: that they all hate Arabs and are racists. For this reason, I am alarmed that not more Jews on the Net have spoken out against what Joachim has said. They have the chance to possibly change the anti-semitic views of some people on the net, to show them that all Jews do *not* hate all Arabs and Muslims, just like all Muslims do *not* hate all Jews. Yet they are missing that chance. Remember, to many people, silence implies consent. Peace. --
2
4,869
:-) I can just imagine it. The mother is wheeled into the labour ward. After delivery a government agent steps up to read the baby its rights... "You have the right to remain silent. If you give up this right anything you say may be taken down and used in evidence against you." "Waaaaaaaaah" -- Anthony Shipman "You've got to be taught before it's too late, CP Software Export Pty Ltd, Before you are six or seven or eight, 19 Cato St., East Hawthorn, To hate all the people your relatives hate, Melbourne, Australia, 3121 You've got to be carefully taught." R&H
3
4,870
Does anyone know of a program for the PC that will take AutoCad DXF format files and convert them to a raster format, like PCX, GIF, etc? Thanks in advance.... ED
7
4,871
Here's a suggestion for the logical argument FAQ. I don't think it's covered, though the fallacy probably has a better name than the one I used: How about it, mathew? INCONSISTENCY AND COUNTEREXAMPLE This occurs when one party points out that some source of information takes stand A, which is inconsistent with B. There are two variations in which B is either a mutually-agreed-on premise or else a stand elsewhere from the same source. The second party fallaciously responds by saying "see, the source really does say B, it's right here!"; this reply does not refute the allegation of inconsistency because it does not show that the source _only_ says B. Example of the first type: "The Koran says unbelievers should be treated in these ways. We can both agree these are immoral." "The Koran clearly says in this other passage that unbelievers are not to be treated that way." Example of the second type: "There are two Biblical creation stories." "You're wrong, since the Bible clearly describes the creation as [description]." -- "On the first day after Christmas my truelove served to me... Leftover Turkey! On the second day after Christmas my truelove served to me... Turkey Casserole that she made from Leftover Turkey. [days 3-4 deleted] ... Flaming Turkey Wings! ... -- Pizza Hut commercial (and M*tlu/A*gic bait)
14
4,872
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This doesn't melt plastic, at least it hasn't melted the plastic bottle that I bought it in yet. Maybe I'd better go check that bottle, its been sittin' awhile -:)
15
4,873
********************************************************************* That's cool; I wish everyone had the smae kind of names; the world would certainly be a better place!!
2
4,874
This might be illegal without a very specific Presidential declaration or even a change in law. In general (sic), U.S. military troops are not permitted to be used for domestic policing operations.
13
4,875
What do you accept as a fact -- the roundness of the earth (after all, the ancient Greeks thought it was a sphere, and then Newton said it was a spheroid, and now people say it's a geoid [?])? yourself (isn't your personal identity just a theoretical construct to make sense of memories, feelings, perceptions)? I'm trying to think of anything that would be a fact for you. Give some examples, and let's see how factual they are by your criteria (BTW, what are your criteria?). "Gravity is _not_ a fact": is that a fact? How about Newton's and Einstein's thoughts about gravity -- is it a fact that they had those thoughts? I don't see how any of the things that you are asserting are any more factual than things like gravity, atoms or evolution. In short, before I am willing to consider your concept of what a fact is, I'm going to have to have, as a minimum, some examples of what you think are facts.
14
4,876
Quite right, your batteries should be perfectly alright and retain most of their charge if drained and dried well, but I'd throw out the electrolyte and buy some more when you need it. And before anyone says I'm wrong, remember that new batteries almost always come ready charged and dry, and they are perfectly OK even after several years' storage at the shop.
0
4,877
Is there a Chicago Cubs mailing list?? If so, I'd like to join. Any help appreciated....
11
4,878
Good point, I'd overlooked that. The Eclipse has a 3 point mount, 1 at the rear and 2 at the front, and it's very stable on the FJ. I have seen some with harnesses that mount to the sides of the tank, and that would be a real problem on the FJ.
0
4,879
A person I know, belonging to a research lab of a rivate company, claimed to me during a priavte conversation that, given the equipment in his lab, he could crack a Kerberos ticket in 15 minutes to an hour. He had access to rather powerful DES hardware, but not of an extraordinare kind, I believe. The attack was possible because of the amount of known plaintext in the ticket, which itself constitutes a small message. This was two years ago. DES is no longer usable for encryption of really sensitive data. For a lot of purposes, however, it is still very adequate.
3
4,880
And it is not Hirschbeck's job to help Gant with any of these difficulties. If Gant can't gather his concentration for whatever reason, that just makes him all the more meat in the batter's box. The umpire's job is to maintain flow of play. Gant is not entitled to time to regather his faculties. Nor is anyone else. Absolutely. I think it'd be more accurate to say Gant was foolish. If a disputed strike call is ample reason for a timeout, games would last about nine-fifteen weeks, if Jack Morris or Dave "Whiner" Stieb were pitching. A disputed strike call is not sufficient for a time out. Suck it up, get back in the box, and never badmouth the blue. They're not going to change their mind, and you're just going to come across as a pinhead, which won't help you with the borderline calls. FTR - I never speak to umpires when I don't know them personally, nor do I glance at them, or react to calls. As a result, I think I get more than my fair share of borderline calls at the plate, because I have a rep of having a good eye. (Actually, there are a lot of negative connotations that go with that rep, including copious questions about my masculinity, party affiliation, and sexual preference.) Irrelevant. He was wasting time THEN. 1. Because it's not his job. 2. Because setting the precedent of cutting slack THERE can easily extend to those 3 hour games. (Kind of like the phantom DP.) Gant hurt himself, and the Braves disrupted the game. Your biases are exposed, and I'm sitting here defending umpires and the SF Giants, which is like Phyllis Schlafly defending Gary Segura, Jack Kevorkian, and the Swedish Abortion Team. I believe Terry said the magic word. There are some truly quick ways to get tossed from a ballgame. For a primer, email me. Good ways to get tossed from a game: 1. Ask Ken Kaiser if he got his money back from Nutri-System. 2. Kiss Rich Garcia on the lips, and say "Hi, Honey, I'm Home!" 3. Goose Eric Gregg. 4. Ask Bruce Froemming if his parents had any children that lived. 5. Get Naked. (Source: The Greg Spira Book of Diamond Ettiquette, as told to Peter Gammons. 1991, Collier Press.)
11
4,881
In Turkish Genocide Apology <9304261739@zuma.UUCP> as scribed by its servile dolt sera@zuma.UUCP (Serdar Argic) we read a response to article <1993Apr26. 175246.24412@colorado.edu> perlman@qso.Colorado.EDU (Eric S. Perlman) who [EP] This has been discussed before, by several people, on this net. The [EP] statement is attributable either to Hajj Amin al-Husseini, former Grand [EP] Mufti of Jerusalem - and the leader of the Palestinian death squads [EP] during the 1948 war, or to one of his chief henchmen. [(*] In Russia General Dro (the Butcher), the architect of the Turkish [(*] genocide in WWI, was working closely with the German Secret [(*] Service. He entered the war zone with his own men and acquired [(*] important intelligence about the Soviets. His experience with [(*] the Turkish genocide in x-Soviet Armenia made him an invaluable [(*] source for the Germans.[2] What a fool! For the above to be true, [which it is not] the WWI Russian General Dro must have worked from his grave to assist x-Soviet Armenia. Soviet Armenia became ex-Soviet Armenia in 1991 and Dro died in 1958! Then Dro would have to travel back in time, while dead, from 1991 to WWII to help Nazi Germany!
2
4,882
You might try the rec.models.rockets newsgroup. Interesting stuff, some of it should probably be classified as artillery. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
0
4,883
Macedonia said yesterday it had neither requested or needs such forces. This is sort of like sending the National Guard to Bel Air when the riot is in South Central! Obviously, Clinton is again trying to make policy for image purposes in America rather than to try to deal with the real problem and assume a share of responsibility for the problem. He obviously didn't even consult with the Macedonians...he was just looking at the map of the former Yugoslavia for the safest place to put American troops so he could say to the Europeans...hey, look, we have troops on the ground in the former Yugoslavia too...now let me bomb so I can make it look like I am doing something in the American media. The problem is that the blue berets in Bosnia are dead meat if Clinton starts bombing, but Clinton doesn't have the courage to ask that the blue berets leave, because then he becomes primarily responsible to the Bosnian policy of the UN and the allies. Clinton wants to have his cake and eat it too...he wants to feel free to use American military power for the sake of domestic US politics and his domestic image, but he doesn't want to assume the primary international leadership role in the UN and among the allies, like Bush, for all his faults, did in the Gulf War... because with leadership comes responsibility, and Clinton seems to want to retain the Europeans as scapegoats. Clinton wants to leave the Europeans in charge and responsible, but wants to freelance on the side...and if his freelancing gets too hot, he wants to be able to cut and run...the American public may be easily fooled...European leaders aren't.
2
4,884
While this is essentially a discussion of reincarnation in the context of Christianity Gerry Palo has made some comparisons to Asian religious beliefs on this topic which have simplified the Asian idea of karma to the point of misrepresentation. There are significant differences in the idea of karma among Hindus, Jains, Buddhists (and even among the various Buddhist traditions.) To refer to karma as a system of reward for past deeds is totally incorrect in the Buddhist and Jain traditions. Karma is considered to be a moral process in which intentions (either good or evil) shape a person's predilections for future intention and action and produce a person who is more prone to good than evil, or the opposite -- "reward" has nothing to do with it. Both Jainism and Buddhism are atheistic so there is no deity to dispense rewards or punishments. Karma is usually described in terms of seeds and reaping the fruit thereof. In fact "As you sow, so shall you reap" is found in the Pali Canon as I recall, the metaphor of natural growth is explicit. Hinduism, or some sects in that tradition, are I believe much more deterministic and involve concepts closer to reward and punishment being theistically inclined. In point of fact, the Theravadin Buddhist tradition of Southeast Asia considers karma as only one of five influences in human life, and in fact from their point of view they would be unable to explain the mechanics of karma without the element of free will. Also in Eastern religions there is a difference between reincarnation and rebirth, which is essentially absent in Western considerations. Isn't Origen usually cited as the most prestigious proponent of reincarnation among Christian thinkers? What were his views, and how did he relate them to the Christian scriptures?
18
4,885
It was brought to my attention that there was an oversight in the SIGKids Research Showcase Call for Participation and Entry Form. Please note that the SIGKids Research Showcase is part of SIGGRAPH '93, August 1-6, 1993 Anaheim, California. Thank you, Diane Schwartz SIGKids Committee Member Institute for the Learning Sciences 1890 Maple Avenue, Suite 150 Evanston, Illinois 60201
7
4,886
I'm interested in a center channel for my home theater. If yu have one and would be interested in selling one please let me know. Thanks. Prefer ably an Infinity or Polk Audio.
1
4,887
LOOK INTO THE FUTURE Discover what lies ahead in Love, Health and Finance Speak LIVE with a Psychic of your choice 900-446-6995 Extension 107 YOU MUST BE 18 OR OVER TO CALL.
1
4,888
Hey dude you are making me paranoid! What an argument!!! No, Frank Crary's arguments are based on the assumption that most people are sane, normal people. tpg disproves this of gun owners. USEnet as a whole disproves it of humanity as a whole. We now have proof positive that guns don't make you safer. Buy a lot of guns and you either get shot in the no knock raid or get the FBI to burn down your house. See even in the paranoid mindset of tpg there are good reasons to support gun control. Cuddles 'n kisses
19
4,889
Rich, First of all you might want to join the VetteNet (vettes@chiller.compaq .com) during your search/acquisition of the 67. $20k sounds about right for a wrong engine, condition 3 car. This means that the car may not have significant investment value but could be an excellent driver and or hobby car. You will also want to get a copy of the Corvette Black Book immediately. Don't leave home (to look at Vettes) without it. Since you are contemplating spending >$20k, you might want to invest a few hours in reading the "Corvette Buyer's Guide" and purchase Noland Adams' tape "How to Buy a Corvette." The tape shows you how to check for damage, etc.. There are many many factors that will affect the value, road worthiness, and repair expense of your proposed 67. The list is much too long to go into here. Join the VetteNet where there are over 100 current Corvette owners (many with 60s vintage vettes) that are available to help you. The pubs I mentioned above are available from Mid-America Designs (800) 637-5533 and several other Corvette parts sources. Good luck!!!
4
4,890
Without restating the thread going here..... Zoloft is a stimulating antidepressant. It is unfortunate that antidepressant therapy is trial and error, but if it is any help, there are a lot of people using the side effects of the many medications to help manage other conditions. Hang in there, maybe someday a "brain chemistry set" will be available and all the serotonin questions will have answers.
9
4,891
PROGRAM EUROCRYPT'93, MAY 23-27, LOFTHUS, NORWAY ------------------------------------------------ General chair : Kaare Presttun email: eurocrypt93@alcatel.no Program chair : Tor Helleseth Department of Informatics University of Bergen N-5020 Bergen NORWAY email: torh@ii.uib.no ========================================================================= MONDAY, May 24 --------------- SESSION 1 : AUTHENTICATION -------------------------- Chair: J. Seberry 9.00- 9.30 Welcome and opening remarks 9.30-10.00 On the Relation Between A-codes and Codes Correcting Independent Errors, T. Johansson, B. Smeets (Lund University, Sweden), and G. Kabatianskii (Institute for Problems of Information Transmission, Russia) 10.00-10.20 Optimal Authentication Systems, R. Safavi-Naini and L. Tombak (University of Wollongong, Australia) 10.20-10.50 Coffee or tea SESSION 2 : PUBLIC KEY ---------------------- Chair: A. Odlyzko 10.50-11.10 Factoring Integers using SIMD Sieves, B. Dixon (Princeton University, USA) and A.K. Lenstra (Bellcore, USA) 11.10-11.30 A New Elliptic Curve Based Analogue of RSA, N. Demytko (Telecom Research Laboratories, Australia) 11.30-11.50 Weaknesses of a Public-Key Cryptosystem Based on Factorization of Finite Groups, J. Stern (ENS, France) 11.50-14.00 Lunch SESSION 3 : BLOCK CIPHERS ------------------------- Chair: A. De Santis 14.00-14.20 Differentially Uniform Mappings for Cryptography, K. Nyberg (Technical University of Vienna, Austria) 14.20-14.40 On Permutations Against Differential Cryptanalysis, T. Beth and C. Ding (EISS, University of Karlsruhe, Germany) 14.40-15.10 Two New Classes of Bent Functions, C. Carlet (INRIA, France) 15.10-15.30 Boolean Functions Satisfying a Higher Order Strict Avalanche Condition, T.W. Cusick (SUNY, Buffalo, USA) 15.30-16.00 Coffee or tea SESSION 4 : SECRET SHARING -------------------------- Chair: Y. Desmedt 16.00-16.30 Size of Shares and Probability of Cheating in Threshold Schemes, M. Carpentieri, A. De Santis and U. Vaccaro (University of Salerno, Italy) 16.30-17.00 Nonperfect Secret Sharing Schemes and Matroids, K. Kurosawa, K. Okada, K. Sakano, W. Ogata and S. Tsujii (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan) TUESDAY, May 25 --------------- SESSION 5 : STREAMCIPHERS I --------------------------- Chair: T. Helleseth 9.00-10.00 From the Memoars of a Norwegian Cryptolog, E. Selmer (University of Bergen, Norway) (Invited talk) 10.00-10.20 On the Linear Complexity of Products of Shift-Register Sequences, R. Gottfert and H. Niderreiter (Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, Austria) 10.20-10.50 Coffee or tea SESSION 6 : STREAMCIPHERS II ---------------------------- Chair: D. Gollman 10.50-11.20 Resynchronisation Weaknesses in Synchronous Stream Ciphers, J. Daemen, R. Govaerts and J. Vandewalle (ESAT, KU Leuven, Belgium) 11.20-11.40 Blind Synchronization of m-Sequences with Even Span, R. Games and J.J. Rushanan (MITRE, USA) 11.40-12.10 On Constructions and Nonlinearity of Correlation Immune Functions, J. Seberry, X. Zhang and Y. Zheng (University of Wollongong, Australia) 12.10-14.00 Lunch SESSION 7 : DIGITAL SIGNATURES ------------------------------ Chair: C. Schnorr 14.00-14.30 Practical and Provable Secure Release of a Secret and Exchange of Signatures, I.B. Damgard (Aarhus University, Denmark) 14.30-14.50 Subliminal Communication is Easy Using the DSA, G.J. Simmons 14.50-15.10 Can OSS be Repaired, D. Naccache (Gemplus, France) 15.10-15.40 Coffee or tea SESSION 8 : PROTOCOLS I ----------------------- Chair: K. Kurosawa 15.40-16.00 Limitations of Logical Analysis of Cryptographic Protocols, C. Boyd and W. Mao (University of Manchester, United Kingdom) 16.00-16.30 Practical Anonymous and Secure Voting Scheme, K. Itoh, C. Park and K. Kurosawa (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan) 16.30-16.50 Untransferable Rights in a Client-Independent Server Environment, J. Domingo-Ferrer (University of Barcelona, Spain) 16.50-17.20 Interactive Hashing Simplifies Zero-Knowledge Protocol Design, R. Ostrovsky (UC Berkeley, USA), R. Venkatesan (Bellcore, USA) and M. Yung (IBM T. Watson, USA) RUMP SESSION ------------- Chair: I. Ingemarsson 20.00-24.00 Accepted paper: Security in Digital Mobile Communication Systems, C. Park, K. Kurosawa, T. Okamoto and S. Tsujii (Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan) WEDNESDAY, May 26 ----------------- SESSION 9 : HASH FUNCTIONS --------------------------- Chair: B. Preneel 9.00- 9.20 One-Way Accumulators: A Decentralized Alternative to Digital Signatures, J. Benaloh and M. de Mare (Clarkson University, USA) 9.20- 9.40 Some Attacks on the ARL Hash Function, I.B. Damgard and L.R. Knudsen (Aarhus University, Denmark) 9.40-10.10 Collisions for the Compression Function of MD5, B. den Boer and A. Bosselaers (ESAT, KU Leuven, Belgium) 10.10-10.30 How to Find and Avoid Collisions for the Knapsack Hash Function, J. Patarin (Bull CP8, France) 10.30-11.00 Coffee or tea SESSION 10: PAYMENT SYSTEMS --------------------------- Chair: I.B. Damgard 11.00-11.20 Single Term Off-Line Coins, N.T. Ferguson (CWI Amsterdam, The Netherlands) 11.20-11.40 Improved Privacy in Wallets with Observers, R.J.F. Cramer (CWI Amsterdam, The Netherlands) and T.P. Pedersen (Aarhus University, Denmark) 11.40-12.10 How to Prevent the Mafia Fraud Using Distance-Bounding Protocols, S. Brands and D. Chaum (CWI Amsterdam, The Netherlands) 12.10-14.00 Lunch SESSION 11: CRYPTANALYSIS -------------------------- Chair: G.J. Simmons 14.00-14.20 On the Distribution of Characteristics in Bijective Mappings, L. O'Connor (University of Waterloo, Canada) 14.20-14.40 On the Security of the IDEA Block Cipher, W. Meier (HTL, Switzerland) 14.40-15.10 Linear Cryptanalysis Method for DES Cipher, M. Matsui (Mitsubishi, Japan) 15.10-15.40 New Types of Cryptanalytic Attacks Using Related Keys, E. Biham (Technion, Israel) 15.40-16.10 Coffee or tea SESSION 12 : PROTOCOLS II ------------------------- Chair: P. Landrock 16.10-16.40 Reconciliation on a Secret Key Through Public Discussion, G. Brassard and L. Salvail (University of Montreal, Canada) 16.40-17.10 Global, Unpredictable Bit Generation Without Broadcast, D. Beaver and N. So (Penn State University, USA) 17.10-17.40 IACR Business meeting ==========================================================================
3
4,892
Yes there is, the patent can be classified as secret. I recently saw a patent from 1947 (dealing with nuclear weapons technology) that was only declassified in the last couple of years. There is of course the problem of enforcing the patent. This is absolutely right.
3
4,893
Archive-name: jpeg-faq Last-modified: 2 May 1993 This FAQ article discusses JPEG image compression. Suggestions for additions and clarifications are welcome. New since version of 18 April 1993: * New version of XV supports 24-bit viewing for X Windows. * New versions of DVPEG & Image Alchemy for DOS. * New versions of Image Archiver & PMView for OS/2. * New listing: MGIF for monochrome-display Ataris. This article includes the following sections: [1] What is JPEG? [2] Why use JPEG? [3] When should I use JPEG, and when should I stick with GIF? [4] How well does JPEG compress images? [5] What are good "quality" settings for JPEG? [6] Where can I get JPEG software? [6A] "canned" software, viewers, etc. [6B] source code [7] What's all this hoopla about color quantization? [8] How does JPEG work? [9] What about lossless JPEG? [10] Why all the argument about file formats? [11] How do I recognize which file format I have, and what do I do about it? [12] What about arithmetic coding? [13] Does loss accumulate with repeated compression/decompression? [14] What are some rules of thumb for converting GIF images to JPEG? Sections 1-6 are basic info that every JPEG user needs to know; sections 7-14 are advanced info for the curious. This article is posted every 2 weeks. You can always find the latest version in the news.answers archive at rtfm.mit.edu (18.70.0.226). By FTP, fetch /pub/usenet/news.answers/jpeg-faq; or if you don't have FTP, send e-mail to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with body "send usenet/news.answers/jpeg-faq". Many other FAQ articles are also stored in this archive. For more instructions on use of the archive, send e-mail to the same address with the words "help" and "index" (no quotes) on separate lines. If you don't get a reply, the server may be misreading your return address; add a line such as "path myname@mysite" to specify your correct e-mail address to reply to. ---------- [1] What is JPEG? JPEG (pronounced "jay-peg") is a standardized image compression mechanism. JPEG stands for Joint Photographic Experts Group, the original name of the committee that wrote the standard. JPEG is designed for compressing either full-color or gray-scale digital images of "natural", real-world scenes. It does not work so well on non-realistic images, such as cartoons or line drawings. JPEG does not handle black-and-white (1-bit-per-pixel) images, nor does it handle motion picture compression. Standards for compressing those types of images are being worked on by other committees, named JBIG and MPEG respectively. JPEG is "lossy", meaning that the image you get out of decompression isn't quite identical to what you originally put in. The algorithm achieves much of its compression by exploiting known limitations of the human eye, notably the fact that small color details aren't perceived as well as small details of light-and-dark. Thus, JPEG is intended for compressing images that will be looked at by humans. If you plan to machine-analyze your images, the small errors introduced by JPEG may be a problem for you, even if they are invisible to the eye. A useful property of JPEG is that the degree of lossiness can be varied by adjusting compression parameters. This means that the image maker can trade off file size against output image quality. You can make *extremely* small files if you don't mind poor quality; this is useful for indexing image archives, making thumbnail views or icons, etc. etc. Conversely, if you aren't happy with the output quality at the default compression setting, you can jack up the quality until you are satisfied, and accept lesser compression. [2] Why use JPEG? There are two good reasons: to make your image files smaller, and to store 24-bit-per-pixel color data instead of 8-bit-per-pixel data. Making image files smaller is a big win for transmitting files across networks and for archiving libraries of images. Being able to compress a 2 Mbyte full-color file down to 100 Kbytes or so makes a big difference in disk space and transmission time! (If you are comparing GIF and JPEG, the size ratio is more like four to one. More details below.) If your viewing software doesn't support JPEG directly, you'll have to convert JPEG to some other format for viewing or manipulating images. Even with a JPEG-capable viewer, it takes longer to decode and view a JPEG image than to view an image of a simpler format (GIF, for instance). Thus, using JPEG is essentially a time/space tradeoff: you give up some time in order to store or transmit an image more cheaply. It's worth noting that when network or phone transmission is involved, the time savings from transferring a shorter file can be much greater than the extra time to decompress the file. I'll let you do the arithmetic yourself. The other reason why JPEG will gradually replace GIF as a standard Usenet posting format is that JPEG can store full color information: 24 bits/pixel (16 million colors) instead of 8 or less (256 or fewer colors). If you have only 8-bit display hardware then this may not seem like much of an advantage to you. Within a couple of years, though, 8-bit GIF will look as obsolete as black-and-white MacPaint format does today. Furthermore, for reasons detailed in section 7, JPEG is far more useful than GIF for exchanging images among people with widely varying color display hardware. Hence JPEG is considerably more appropriate than GIF for use as a Usenet posting standard. [3] When should I use JPEG, and when should I stick with GIF? JPEG is *not* going to displace GIF entirely; for some types of images, GIF is superior in image quality, file size, or both. One of the first things to learn about JPEG is which kinds of images to apply it to. As a rule of thumb, JPEG is superior to GIF for storing full-color or gray-scale images of "realistic" scenes; that means scanned photographs and similar material. JPEG is superior even if you don't have 24-bit display hardware, and it is a LOT superior if you do. (See section 7 for details.) GIF does significantly better on images with only a few distinct colors, such as cartoons and line drawings. In particular, large areas of pixels that are all *exactly* the same color are compressed very efficiently indeed by GIF. JPEG can't squeeze these files as much as GIF does without introducing visible defects. This sort of image is best kept in GIF form. (In particular, single-color borders are quite cheap in GIF files, but they should be avoided in JPEG files.) JPEG also has a hard time with very sharp edges: a row of pure-black pixels adjacent to a row of pure-white pixels, for example. Sharp edges tend to come out blurred unless you use a very high quality setting. Again, this sort of thing is not found in scanned photographs, but it shows up fairly often in GIF files: borders, overlaid text, etc. The blurriness is particularly objectionable with text that's only a few pixels high. If you have a GIF with a lot of small-size overlaid text, don't JPEG it. Computer-drawn images (ray-traced scenes, for instance) usually fall between scanned images and cartoons in terms of complexity. The more complex and subtly rendered the image, the more likely that JPEG will do well on it. The same goes for semi-realistic artwork (fantasy drawings and such). Plain black-and-white (two level) images should never be converted to JPEG. You need at least about 16 gray levels before JPEG is useful for gray-scale images. It should also be noted that GIF is lossless for gray-scale images of up to 256 levels, while JPEG is not. If you have an existing library of GIF images, you may wonder whether you should convert them to JPEG. You will lose a little image quality if you do. (Section 7, which argues that JPEG image quality is superior to GIF, only applies if both formats start from a full-color original. If you start from a GIF, you've already irretrievably lost a great deal of information; JPEG can only make things worse.) However, the disk space savings may justify converting anyway. This is a decision you'll have to make for yourself. If you do convert a GIF library to JPEG, see section 14 for hints. Be prepared to leave some images in GIF format, since some GIFs will not convert well. [4] How well does JPEG compress images? Pretty darn well. Here are some sample file sizes for an image I have handy, a 727x525 full-color image of a ship in a harbor. The first three files are for comparison purposes; the rest were created with the free JPEG software described in section 6B. File Size in bytes Comments ship.ppm 1145040 Original file in PPM format (no compression; 24 bits or 3 bytes per pixel, plus a few bytes overhead) ship.ppm.Z 963829 PPM file passed through Unix compress compress doesn't accomplish a lot, you'll note. Other text-oriented compressors give similar results. ship.gif 240438 Converted to GIF with ppmquant -fs 256 | ppmtogif Most of the savings is the result of losing color info: GIF saves 8 bits/pixel, not 24. (See sec. 7.) ship.jpg95 155622 cjpeg -Q 95 (highest useful quality setting) This is indistinguishable from the 24-bit original, at least to my nonprofessional eyeballs. ship.jpg75 58009 cjpeg -Q 75 (default setting) You have to look mighty darn close to distinguish this from the original, even with both on-screen at once. ship.jpg50 38406 cjpeg -Q 50 This has slight defects; if you know what to look for, you could tell it's been JPEGed without seeing the original. Still as good image quality as many recent postings in Usenet pictures groups. ship.jpg25 25192 cjpeg -Q 25 JPEG's characteristic "blockiness" becomes apparent at this setting (djpeg -blocksmooth helps some). Still, I've seen plenty of Usenet postings that were of poorer image quality than this. ship.jpg5o 6587 cjpeg -Q 5 -optimize (-optimize cuts table overhead) Blocky, but perfectly satisfactory for preview or indexing purposes. Note that this file is TINY: the compression ratio from the original is 173:1 ! In this case JPEG can make a file that's a factor of four or five smaller than a GIF of comparable quality (the -Q 75 file is every bit as good as the GIF, better if you have a full-color display). This seems to be a typical ratio for real-world scenes. [5] What are good "quality" settings for JPEG? Most JPEG compressors let you pick a file size vs. image quality tradeoff by selecting a quality setting. There seems to be widespread confusion about the meaning of these settings. "Quality 95" does NOT mean "keep 95% of the information", as some have claimed. The quality scale is purely arbitrary; it's not a percentage of anything. The name of the game in using JPEG is to pick the lowest quality setting (smallest file size) that decompresses into an image indistinguishable from the original. This setting will vary from one image to another and from one observer to another, but here are some rules of thumb. The default quality setting (-Q 75) is very often the best choice. This setting is about the lowest you can go without expecting to see defects in a typical image. Try -Q 75 first; if you see defects, then go up. Except for experimental purposes, never go above -Q 95; saying -Q 100 will produce a file two or three times as large as -Q 95, but of hardly any better quality. If the image was less than perfect quality to begin with, you might be able to go down to -Q 50 without objectionable degradation. On the other hand, you might need to go to a HIGHER quality setting to avoid further degradation. The second case seems to apply much of the time when converting GIFs to JPEG. The default -Q 75 is about right for compressing 24-bit images, but -Q 85 to 95 is usually better for converting GIFs (see section 14 for more info). If you want a very small file (say for preview or indexing purposes) and are prepared to tolerate large defects, a -Q setting in the range of 5 to 10 is about right. -Q 2 or so may be amusing as "op art". (Note: the quality settings discussed in this article apply to the free JPEG software described in section 6B, and to many programs based on it. Other JPEG implementations, such as Image Alchemy, may use a completely different quality scale. Some programs don't even provide a numeric scale, just "high"/"medium"/"low"-style choices.) [6] Where can I get JPEG software? Most of the programs described in this section are available by FTP. If you don't know how to use FTP, see the FAQ article "How to find sources". (If you don't have direct access to FTP, read about ftpmail servers in the same article.) That article appears regularly in news.answers, or you can get it by sending e-mail to mail-server@rtfm.mit.edu with "send usenet/news.answers/finding-sources" in the body. The "Anonymous FTP List FAQ" may also be helpful --- it's usenet/news.answers/ftp-list/faq in the news.answers archive. NOTE: this list changes constantly. If you have a copy more than a couple months old, get the latest JPEG FAQ from the news.answers archive. [6A] If you are looking for "canned" software, viewers, etc: The first part of this list is system-specific programs that only run on one kind of system. If you don't see what you want for your machine, check out the portable JPEG software described at the end of the list. Note that this list concentrates on free and shareware programs that you can obtain over Internet; but some commercial programs are listed too. X Windows: XV (shareware, $25) is an excellent viewer for JPEG, GIF, and many other image formats. It can also do format conversion and some simple image manipulations. It's available for FTP from export.lcs.mit.edu (18.24.0.12), file contrib/xv-3.00.tar.Z. Version 3.00 is a major upgrade with support for 24-bit displays and many other improvements; however, it is brand new and still has some bugs lurking. If you prefer not to be on the bleeding edge, stick with version 2.21, also available from export. Note that version 2.21 is not a good choice if you have a 24-bit display (you'll get only 8-bit color), nor for converting 24-bit images to JPEG. But 2.21 works fine for converting GIF and other 8-bit images to JPEG. CAUTION: there is a glitch in version 2.21: be sure to check the "save at normal size" checkbox when saving a JPEG file, or the file will be blurry. Another good choice for X Windows is John Cristy's free ImageMagick package, also available from export.lcs.mit.edu, file contrib/ImageMagick.tar.Z. This package handles many image processing and conversion tasks. The ImageMagick viewer handles 24-bit displays correctly; for colormapped displays, it does better (though slower) color quantization than XV or the basic free JPEG software. Both of the above are large, complex packages. If you just want a simple image viewer, try xloadimage or xli. xloadimage supports JPEG in its latest release, 3.03. xloadimage is free and available from export.lcs.mit.edu, file contrib/xloadimage-3.03.tar.Z. xli is a variant version of xloadimage, said by its fans to be somewhat faster and more robust than the original. (The current xli is indeed faster and more robust than the current xloadimage, at least with respect to JPEG files, because it has the IJG v4 decoder while xloadimage 3.03 is using a hacked-over v1. The next xloadimage release will fix this.) xli is also free and available from export.lcs.mit.edu, file contrib/xli.1.14.tar.Z. Both programs are said to do the right thing with 24-bit displays. MS-DOS: This covers plain DOS; for Windows or OS/2 programs, see the next headings. One good choice is Eric Praetzel's free DVPEG, which views JPEG and GIF files. The current version, 2.5, is available by FTP from sunee.uwaterloo.ca (129.97.50.50), file pub/jpeg/viewers/dvpeg25.zip. This is a good basic viewer that works on either 286 or 386/486 machines. The user interface is not flashy, but it's functional. Another freeware JPEG/GIF/TGA viewer is Mohammad Rezaei's Hiview. The current version, 1.2, is available from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE below), file msdos/graphics/hv12.zip. Hiview requires a 386 or better CPU and a VCPI-compatible memory manager (QEMM386 and 386MAX work; Windows and OS/2 do not). Hiview is currently the fastest viewer for images that are no bigger than your screen. For larger images, it scales the image down to fit on the screen (rather than using panning/scrolling as most viewers do). You may or may not prefer this approach, but there's no denying that it slows down loading of large images considerably. Note: installation is a bit tricky; read the directions carefully! A shareware alternative is ColorView for DOS ($30). This is easier to install than either of the two freeware alternatives. Its user interface is also much spiffier-looking, although personally I find it harder to use --- more keystrokes, inconsistent behavior. It is faster than DVPEG but a little slower than Hiview, at least on my hardware. (For images larger than screen size, DVPEG and ColorView seem to be about the same speed, and both are faster than Hiview.) The current version is 2.1, available from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE below), file msdos/graphics/dcview21.zip. Requires a VESA graphics driver; if you don't have one, look in vesadrv2.zip or vesa-tsr.zip from the same directory. (Many recent PCs have a built-in VESA driver, so don't try to load a VESA driver unless ColorView complains that the driver is missing.) A second shareware alternative is Fullview, which has been kicking around the net for a while, but I don't know any stable archive location for it. The current (rather old) version is inferior to the above viewers anyway. The author tells me that a new version of Fullview will be out shortly and it will be submitted to the Simtel20 archives at that time. The well-known GIF viewer CompuShow (CSHOW) supports JPEG in its latest revision, 8.60a. However, CSHOW's JPEG implementation isn't very good: it's slow (about half the speed of the above viewers) and image quality is poor except on hi-color displays. Too bad ... it'd have been nice to see a good JPEG capability in CSHOW. Shareware, $25. Available from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE below), file msdos/gif/cshw860a.zip. Due to the remarkable variety of PC graphics hardware, any one of these viewers might not work on your particular machine. If you can't get *any* of them to work, you'll need to use one of the following conversion programs to convert JPEG to GIF, then view with your favorite GIF viewer. (If you have hi-color hardware, don't use GIF as the intermediate format; try to find a TARGA-capable viewer instead. VPIC5.0 is reputed to do the right thing with hi-color displays.) The Independent JPEG Group's free JPEG converters are FTPable from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE below), file msdos/graphics/jpeg4.zip (or jpeg4386.zip if you have a 386 and extended memory). These files are DOS compilations of the free source code described in section 6B; they will convert JPEG to and from GIF, Targa, and PPM formats. Handmade Software offers free JPEG<=>GIF conversion tools, GIF2JPG/JPG2GIF. These are slow and are limited to conversion to and from GIF format; in particular, you can't get 24-bit color output from a JPEG. The major advantage of these tools is that they will read and write HSI's proprietary JPEG format as well as the Usenet-standard JFIF format. Since HSI-format files are rather widespread on BBSes, this is a useful capability. Version 2.0 of these tools is free (prior versions were shareware). Get it from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE below), file msdos/graphics/gif2jpg2.zip. NOTE: do not use HSI format for files to be posted on Internet, since it is not readable on non-PC platforms. Handmade Software also has a shareware image conversion and manipulation package, Image Alchemy. This will translate JPEG files (both JFIF and HSI formats) to and from many other image formats. It can also display images. A demo version of Image Alchemy version 1.6.2 is available from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE below), file msdos/graphics/alch162.zip. NOTE ABOUT SIMTEL20: The Internet's key archive site for PC-related programs is Simtel20, full name wsmr-simtel20.army.mil (192.88.110.20). Simtel20 runs a non-Unix system with weird directory names; where this document refers to directory (eg) "msdos/graphics" at Simtel20, that really means "pd1:<msdos.graphics>". If you are not physically on MILnet, you should expect rather slow FTP transfer rates from Simtel20. There are several Internet sites that maintain copies (mirrors) of the Simtel20 archives; most FTP users should go to one of the mirror sites instead. A popular USA mirror site is oak.oakland.edu (141.210.10.117), which keeps Simtel20 files in (eg) "/pub/msdos/graphics". If you have no FTP capability, you can retrieve files from Simtel20 by e-mail; see informational postings in comp.archives.msdos.announce to find out how. If you are outside the USA, consult the same newsgroup to learn where your nearest Simtel20 mirror is. Microsoft Windows: There are several Windows programs capable of displaying JPEG images. (Windows viewers are generally slower than DOS viewers on the same hardware, due to Windows' system overhead. Note that you can run the DOS conversion programs described above inside a Windows DOS window.) The newest entry is WinECJ, which is free and EXTREMELY fast. Version 1.0 is available from ftp.rahul.net, file /pub/bryanw/pc/jpeg/wecj.zip. Requires Windows 3.1 and 256-or-more-colors mode. This is a no-frills viewer with the bad habit of hogging the machine completely while it decodes; and the image quality is noticeably worse than other viewers. But it's so fast you'll use it anyway, at least for previewing... JView is freeware, fairly fast, has good on-line help, and can write out the decompressed image in Windows BMP format; but it can't create new JPEG files, and it doesn't view GIFs. JView also lacks some other useful features of the shareware viewers (such as brightness adjustment), but it's an excellent basic viewer. The current version, 0.9, is available from ftp.cica.indiana.edu (129.79.20.84), file pub/pc/win3/desktop/jview090.zip. (Mirrors of this archive can be found at some other Internet sites, including wuarchive.wustl.edu.) WinJPEG (shareware, $20) displays JPEG,GIF,Targa,TIFF, and BMP image files; it can write all of these formats too, so it can be used as a converter. It has some other nifty features including color-balance adjustment and slideshow. The current version is 2.1, available from Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE above), file msdos/windows3/winjp210.zip. (This is a slow 286-compatible version; if you register, you'll get the 386-only version, which is roughly 25% faster.) ColorView is another shareware entry ($30). This was an early and promising contender, but it has not been updated in some time, and at this point it has no real advantages over WinJPEG. If you want to try it anyway, the current version is 0.97, available from ftp.cica.indiana.edu, file pub/pc/win3/desktop/cview097.zip. (I understand that a new version will be appearing once the authors are finished with ColorView for DOS.) DVPEG (see DOS heading) also works under Windows, but only in full-screen mode, not in a window. OS/2: The following files are available from hobbes.nmsu.edu (128.123.35.151). Note: check /pub/uploads for more recent versions --- the hobbes moderator is not very fast about moving uploads into their permanent directories. /pub/os2/2.x/graphics/jpegv4.zip 32-bit version of free IJG conversion programs, version 4. /pub/os2/all/graphics/jpeg4-16.zip 16-bit version of same, for OS/2 1.x. /pub/os2/2.x/graphics/imgarc12.zip Image Archiver 1.02: image conversion/viewing with PM graphical interface. Strong on conversion functions, viewing is a bit weaker. Shareware, $15. /pub/os2/2.x/graphics/pmjpeg11.zip PMJPEG 1.1: OS/2 2.x port of WinJPEG, a popular viewer for Windows (see description in Windows section). Shareware, $20. /pub/os2/2.x/graphics/pmview85.zip PMView 0.85: JPEG/GIF/BMP viewer. GIF viewing very fast, JPEG viewing fast if you have huge amounts of RAM, otherwise about the same speed as the above programs. Strong 24-bit display support. Shareware, $20. Macintosh: Most Mac JPEG programs rely on Apple's JPEG implementation, which is part of the QuickTime system extension; so you need to have QuickTime installed. To use QuickTime, you need a 68020 or better CPU and you need to be running System 6.0.7 or later. (If you're running System 6, you must also install the 32-bit QuickDraw extension; this is built-in on System 7.) You can get QuickTime by FTP from ftp.apple.com, file dts/mac/quicktime/quicktime.hqx. (As of 11/92, this file contains QuickTime 1.5, which is better than QT 1.0 in several ways. With respect to JPEG, it is marginally faster and considerably less prone to crash when fed a corrupt JPEG file. However, some applications seem to have compatibility problems with QT 1.5.) Mac users should keep in mind that QuickTime's JPEG format, PICT/JPEG, is not the same as the Usenet-standard JFIF JPEG format. (See section 10 for details.) If you post images on Usenet, make sure they are in JFIF format. Most of the programs mentioned below can generate either format. The first choice is probably JPEGView, a free program for viewing images that are in JFIF format, PICT/JPEG format, or GIF format. It also can convert between the two JPEG formats. The current version, 2.0, is a big improvement over prior versions. Get it from sumex-aim.stanford.edu (36.44.0.6), file /info-mac/app/jpeg-view-20.hqx. Requires System 7 and QuickTime. On 8-bit displays, JPEGView usually produces the best color image quality of all the currently available Mac JPEG viewers. JPEGView can view large images in much less memory than other Mac viewers; in fact, it's the only one that can deal with JPEG images much over 640x480 pixels on a typical 4MB Mac. Given a large image, JPEGView automatically scales it down to fit on the screen, rather than presenting scroll bars like most other viewers. (You can zoom in on any desired portion, though.) Some people like this behavior, some don't. Overall, JPEGView's user interface is very well thought out. GIFConverter, a shareware ($40) image viewer/converter, supports JFIF and PICT/JPEG, as well as GIF and several other image formats. The latest version is 2.3.2. Get it from sumex-aim.stanford.edu, file /info-mac/art/gif/gif-converter-232.hqx. Requires System 6.0.5 or later. GIFConverter is not better than JPEGView as a plain JPEG/GIF viewer, but it has much more extensive image manipulation and format conversion capabilities, so you may find it worth its shareware fee if you do a lot of playing around with images. Also, the newest version of GIFConverter can load and save JFIF images *without* QuickTime, so it is your best bet if your machine is too old to run QuickTime. (But it's faster with QuickTime.) Note: If GIFConverter runs out of memory trying to load a large JPEG, try converting the file to GIF with JPEG Convert, then viewing the GIF version. JPEG Convert, a Mac version of the free IJG JPEG conversion utilities, is available from sumex-aim.stanford.edu, file /info-mac/app/jpeg-convert-10.hqx. This will run on any Mac, but it only does file conversion, not viewing. You can use it in conjunction with any GIF viewer. Previous versions of this FAQ recommended Imagery JPEG v0.6, a JPEG<=>GIF converter based on an old version of the IJG code. If you are using this program, you definitely should replace it with JPEG Convert. Apple's free program PictPixie can view images in JFIF, QuickTime JPEG, and GIF format, and can convert between these formats. You can get PictPixie from ftp.apple.com, file dts/mac/quicktime/qt.1.0.stuff/pictpixie.hqx. Requires QuickTime. PictPixie was intended as a developer's tool, and it's really not the best choice unless you like to fool around with QuickTime. Some of its drawbacks are that it requires lots of memory, it produces relatively poor color image quality on anything less than a 24-bit display, and it has a relatively unfriendly user interface. Worse, PictPixie is an unsupported program, meaning it has some minor bugs that Apple does not intend to fix. (There is an old version of PictPixie, called PICTCompressor, floating around the net. If you have this you should trash it, as it's even buggier. Also, the QuickTime Starter Kit includes a much cleaned-up descendant of PictPixie called Picture Compressor. Note that Picture Compressor is NOT free and may not be distributed on the net.) Storm Technology's Picture Decompress is a free JPEG viewer/converter. This rather old program is inferior to the above programs in many ways, but it will run without System 7 or QuickTime, so you may be forced to use it on older systems. (It does need 32-bit QuickDraw, so really old machines can't use it.) You can get it from sumex-aim.stanford.edu, file /info-mac/app/picture-decompress-201.hqx. You must set the file type of a downloaded image file to 'JPEG' to allow Picture Decompress to open it. If your machine is too old to run 32-bit QuickDraw (a Mac Plus for instance), GIFConverter is your only choice for single-program JPEG viewing. If you don't want to pay for GIFConverter, use JPEG Convert and a free GIF viewer. More and more commercial Mac applications are supporting JPEG, although not all can deal with the Usenet-standard JFIF format. Adobe Photoshop, version 2.0.1 or later, can read and write JFIF-format JPEG files (use the JPEG plug-in from the Acquire menu). You must set the file type of a downloaded JPEG file to 'JPEG' to allow Photoshop to recognize it. Amiga: (Most programs listed in this section are stored in the AmiNet archive at amiga.physik.unizh.ch (130.60.80.80). There are many mirror sites of this archive and you should try to use the closest one. In the USA, a good choice is wuarchive.wustl.edu; look under /mirrors/amiga.physik.unizh.ch/...) HamLab Plus is an excellent JPEG viewer/converter, as well as being a general image manipulation tool. It's cheap (shareware, $20) and can read several formats besides JPEG. The current version is 2.0.8. A demo version is available from amiga.physik.unizh.ch (and mirror sites), file amiga/gfx/edit/hamlab208d.lha. The demo version will crop images larger than 512x512, but it is otherwise fully functional. Rend24 (shareware, $30) is an image renderer that can display JPEG, ILBM, and GIF images. The program can be used to create animations, even capturing frames on-the-fly from rendering packages like Lightwave. The current version is 1.05, available from amiga.physik.unizh.ch (and mirror sites), file amiga/os30/gfx/rend105.lha. (Note: although this directory is supposedly for AmigaDOS 3.0 programs, the program will also run under AmigaDOS 1.3, 2.04 or 2.1.) Viewtek is a free JPEG/ILBM/GIF/ANIM viewer. The current version is 1.04, available from amiga.physik.unizh.ch (and mirror sites), file amiga/gfx/show/ViewTek104.lha. If you're willing to spend real money, there are several commercial packages that support JPEG. Two are written by Thomas Krehbiel, the author of Rend24 and Viewtek. These are CineMorph, a standalone image morphing package, and ImageFX, an impressive 24-bit image capture, conversion, editing, painting, effects and prepress package that also includes CineMorph. Both are distributed by Great Valley Products. Art Department Professional (ADPro), from ASDG Inc, is the most widely used commercial image manipulation software for Amigas. ImageMaster, from Black Belt Systems, is another well-regarded commercial graphics package with JPEG support. The free IJG JPEG software is available compiled for Amigas from amiga.physik.unizh.ch (and mirror sites) in directory amiga/gfx/conv, file AmigaJPEGV4.lha. These programs convert JPEG to/from PPM,GIF,Targa formats. The Amiga world is heavily infested with quick-and-dirty JPEG programs, many based on an ancient beta-test version of the free IJG JPEG software (thanks to a certain magazine that published same on its disk-of-the-month, without so much as notifying the authors). Among these are "AugJPEG", "NewAmyJPEG", "VJPEG", and probably others I have not even heard of. In my opinion, anything older than IJG version 3 (March 1992) is not worth the disk space it's stored on; if you have such a program, trash it and get something newer. Atari ST: The free IJG JPEG software is available compiled for Atari ST, TT, etc, from atari.archive.umich.edu, file /atari/Graphics/jpeg4bin.zoo. These programs convert JPEG to/from PPM, GIF, Targa formats. For monochrome ST monitors, try MGIF, which manages to achieve four-level grayscale effect by flickering. Version 4.1 reads JPEG files. Available from atari.archive.umich.edu, file /atari/Graphics/mgif41b.zoo. I have not heard of any other free or shareware JPEG-capable viewers for Ataris, but surely there must be some by now? Pointers appreciated. Acorn Archimedes: !ChangeFSI, supplied with RISC OS 3 version 3.10, can convert from and view JPEG JFIF format. Provision is also made to convert images to JPEG, although this must be done from the CLI rather than by double-clicking. Recent versions (since 7.11) of the shareware program Translator can handle JPEG, along with about 30 other image formats. While older versions can be found on some Archimedes bboards, the current version is only available by registering with the author, John Kortink, Nutterbrink 31, 7544 WJ, Enschede, The Netherlands. Price 35 Dutch guilders (about $22 or 10 pounds). There's also a commercial product called !JPEG which provides JPEG read/write functionality and direct JPEG viewing, as well as a host of other image format conversion and processing options. This is more expensive but not necessarily better than the above programs. Contact: DT Software, FREEPOST, Cambridge, UK. Tel: 0223 841099. Portable software for almost any system: If none of the above fits your situation, you can obtain and compile the free JPEG conversion software described in 6B. You'll also need a viewer program. If your display is 8 bits or less, any GIF viewer will do fine; if you have a display with more color capability, try to find a viewer that can read Targa or PPM 24-bit image files. There are numerous commercial JPEG offerings, with more popping up every day. I recommend that you not spend money on one of these unless you find the available free or shareware software vastly too slow. In that case, purchase a hardware-assisted product. Ask pointed questions about whether the product complies with the final JPEG standard and about whether it can handle the JFIF file format; many of the earliest commercial releases are not and never will be compatible with anyone else's files. [6B] If you are looking for source code to work with: Free, portable C code for JPEG compression is available from the Independent JPEG Group, which I lead. A package containing our source code, documentation, and some small test files is available from several places. The "official" archive site for this source code is ftp.uu.net (137.39.1.9 or 192.48.96.9). Look under directory /graphics/jpeg; the current release is jpegsrc.v4.tar.Z. (This is a compressed TAR file; don't forget to retrieve in binary mode.) You can retrieve this file by FTP or UUCP. If you are on a PC and don't know how to cope with .tar.Z format, you may prefer ZIP format, which you can find at Simtel20 and mirror sites (see NOTE above), file msdos/graphics/jpegsrc4.zip. This file will also be available on CompuServe, in the GRAPHSUPPORT forum (GO PICS), library 15, as jpsrc4.zip. If you have no FTP access, you can retrieve the source from your nearest comp.sources.misc archive; version 4 appeared as issues 55-72 of volume 34. (If you don't know how to retrieve comp.sources.misc postings, see the FAQ article "How to find sources", referred to at the top of section 6.) The free JPEG code provides conversion between JPEG "JFIF" format and image files in GIF, PBMPLUS PPM/PGM, Utah RLE, and Truevision Targa file formats. The core compression and decompression modules can easily be reused in other programs, such as image viewers. The package is highly portable; we have tested it on many machines ranging from PCs to Crays. We have released this software for both noncommercial and commercial use. Companies are welcome to use it as the basis for JPEG-related products. We do not ask a royalty, although we do ask for an acknowledgement in product literature (see the README file in the distribution for details). We hope to make this software industrial-quality --- although, as with anything that's free, we offer no warranty and accept no liability. The Independent JPEG Group is a volunteer organization; if you'd like to contribute to improving our software, you are welcome to join. [7] What's all this hoopla about color quantization? Most people don't have full-color (24 bit per pixel) display hardware. Typical display hardware stores 8 or fewer bits per pixel, so it can display 256 or fewer distinct colors at a time. To display a full-color image, the computer must map the image into an appropriate set of representative colors. This process is called "color quantization". (This is something of a misnomer, "color selection" would be a better term. We're stuck with the standard usage though.) Clearly, color quantization is a lossy process. It turns out that for most images, the details of the color quantization algorithm have MUCH more impact on the final image quality than do any errors introduced by JPEG (except at the very lowest JPEG quality settings). Since JPEG is a full-color format, converting a color JPEG image for display on 8-bit-or-less hardware requires color quantization. This is true for *all* color JPEGs: even if you feed a 256-or-less-color GIF into JPEG, what comes out of the decompressor is *not* 256 colors, but thousands of colors. This happens because JPEG's lossiness affects each pixel a little differently, so two pixels that started with identical colors will probably come out with slightly different colors. Each original color gets "smeared" into a group of nearby colors. Therefore quantization is always required to display a color JPEG on a colormapped display, regardless of the image source. The only way to avoid quantization is to ask for gray-scale output. (Incidentally, because of this effect it's nearly meaningless to talk about the number of colors used by a JPEG image. Even if you attempted to count the number of distinct pixel values, different JPEG decoders would give you different results because of roundoff error differences. I occasionally see posted images described as "256-color JPEG". This tells me that the poster (a) hasn't read this FAQ and (b) probably converted the JPEG from a GIF. JPEGs can be classified as color or gray-scale (just like photographs), but number of colors just isn't a useful concept for JPEG.) On the other hand, a GIF image by definition has already been quantized to 256 or fewer colors. (A GIF *does* have a definite number of colors in its palette, and the format doesn't allow more than 256 palette entries.) For purposes of Usenet picture distribution, GIF has the advantage that the sender precomputes the color quantization, so recipients don't have to. This is also the *disadvantage* of GIF: you're stuck with the sender's quantization. If the sender quantized to a different number of colors than what you can display, you have to re-quantize, resulting in much poorer image quality than if you had quantized once from a full-color image. Furthermore, if the sender didn't use a high-quality color quantization algorithm, you're out of luck. For this reason, JPEG offers the promise of significantly better image quality for all users whose machines don't match the sender's display hardware. JPEG's full color image can be quantized to precisely match the user's display hardware. Furthermore, you will be able to take advantage of future improvements in quantization algorithms (there is a lot of active research in this area), or purchase better display hardware, to get a better view of JPEG images you already have. With a GIF, you're stuck forevermore with what was sent. It's also worth mentioning that many GIF-viewing programs include rather shoddy quantization routines. If you view a 256-color GIF on a 16-color EGA display, for example, you are probably getting a much worse image than you need to. This is partly an inevitable consequence of doing two color quantizations (one to create the GIF, one to display it), but often it's also due to sloppiness. JPEG conversion programs will be forced to use high quality quantizers in order to get acceptable results at all, and in normal use they will quantize directly to the number of colors to be displayed. Thus, JPEG is likely to provide better results than the average GIF program for low-color-resolution displays as well as high-resolution ones! Finally, an ever-growing number of people have better-than-8-bit display hardware already: 15-bit "hi-color" PC displays, true 24-bit displays on workstations and Macintoshes, etc. For these people, GIF is already obsolete, as it cannot represent an image to the full capabilities of their display. JPEG images can drive these displays much more effectively. Thus, JPEG is an all-around better choice than GIF for representing images in a machine-independent fashion. [8] How does JPEG work? The buzz-words to know are chrominance subsampling, discrete cosine transforms, coefficient quantization, and Huffman or arithmetic entropy coding. This article's long enough already, so I'm not going to say more than that here. For technical information, see the comp.compression FAQ. This is available from the news.answers archive at rtfm.mit.edu, in files /pub/usenet/news.answers/compression-faq/part[1-3]. If you need help in using the news.answers archive, see the top of this article. [9] What about lossless JPEG? There's a great deal of confusion on this subject. The JPEG committee did define a truly lossless compression algorithm, i.e., one that guarantees the final output is bit-for-bit identical to the original input. However, this lossless mode has almost nothing in common with the regular, lossy JPEG algorithm, and it offers much less compression. At present, very few implementations of lossless JPEG exist, and all of them are commercial. Saying "-Q 100" to the free JPEG software DOES NOT get you a lossless image. What it does get rid of is deliberate information loss in the coefficient quantization step. There is still a good deal of information loss in the color subsampling step. (With the V4 free JPEG code, you can also say "-sample 1x1" to turn off subsampling. Keep in mind that many commercial JPEG implementations cannot cope with the resulting file.) Even with both quantization and subsampling turned off, the regular JPEG algorithm is not lossless, because it is subject to roundoff errors in various calculations. The maximum error is a few counts in any one pixel value; it's highly unlikely that this could be perceived by the human eye, but it might be a concern if you are doing machine processing of an image. At this minimum-loss setting, regular JPEG produces files that are perhaps half the size of an uncompressed 24-bit-per-pixel image. True lossless JPEG provides roughly the same amount of compression, but it guarantees bit-for-bit accuracy. If you have an application requiring lossless storage of images with less than 6 bits per pixel (per color component), you may want to look into the JBIG bilevel image compression standard. This performs better than JPEG lossless on such images. JPEG lossless is superior to JBIG on images with 6 or more bits per pixel; furthermore, JPEG is public domain (at least with a Huffman back end), while the JBIG techniques are heavily covered by patents. [10] Why all the argument about file formats? Strictly speaking, JPEG refers only to a family of compression algorithms; it does *not* refer to a specific image file format. The JPEG committee was prevented from defining a file format by turf wars within the international standards organizations. Since we can't actually exchange images with anyone else unless we agree on a common file format, this leaves us with a problem. In the absence of official standards, a number of JPEG program writers have just gone off to "do their own thing", and as a result their programs aren't compatible with anybody else's. The closest thing we have to a de-facto standard JPEG format is some work that's been coordinated by people at C-Cube Microsystems. They have defined two JPEG-based file formats: * JFIF (JPEG File Interchange Format), a "low-end" format that transports pixels and not much else. * TIFF/JPEG, aka TIFF 6.0, an extension of the Aldus TIFF format. TIFF is a "high-end" format that will let you record just about everything you ever wanted to know about an image, and a lot more besides :-). TIFF is a lot more complex than JFIF, and may well prove less transportable, because different vendors have historically implemented slightly different and incompatible subsets of TIFF. It's not likely that adding JPEG to the mix will do anything to improve this situation. Both of these formats were developed with input from all the major vendors of JPEG-related products; it's reasonably likely that future commercial products will adhere to one or both standards. I believe that Usenet should adopt JFIF as the replacement for GIF in picture postings. JFIF is simpler than TIFF and is available now; the TIFF 6.0 spec has only recently been officially adopted, and it is still unusably vague on some crucial details. Even when TIFF/JPEG is well defined, the JFIF format is likely to be a widely supported "lowest common denominator"; TIFF/JPEG files may never be as transportable. A particular case that people may be interested in is Apple's QuickTime software for the Macintosh. QuickTime uses a JFIF-compatible format wrapped inside the Mac-specific PICT structure. Conversion between JFIF and QuickTime JPEG is pretty straightforward, and several Mac programs are available to do it (see Mac portion of section 6A). If you have an editor that handles binary files, you can strip a QuickTime JPEG PICT down to JFIF by hand; see section 11 for details. Another particular case is Handmade Software's programs (GIF2JPG/JPG2GIF and Image Alchemy). These programs are capable of reading and writing JFIF format. By default, though, they write a proprietary format developed by HSI. This format is NOT readable by any non-HSI programs and should not be used for Usenet postings. Use the -j switch to get JFIF output. (This applies to old versions of these programs; the current releases emit JFIF format by default. You still should be careful not to post HSI-format files, unless you want to get flamed by people on non-PC platforms.) [11] How do I recognize which file format I have, and what do I do about it? If you have an alleged JPEG file that your software won't read, it's likely to be HSI format or some other proprietary JPEG-based format. You can tell what you have by inspecting the first few bytes of the file: 1. A JFIF-standard file will start with the characters (hex) FF D8 FF E0, followed by two variable bytes (often hex 00 10), followed by 'JFIF'. 2. If you see FF D8 at the start, but not the rest of it, you may have a "raw JPEG" file. This is probably decodable as-is by JFIF software --- it's worth a try, anyway. 3. HSI files start with 'hsi1'. You're out of luck unless you have HSI software. Portions of the file may look like plain JPEG data, but they won't decompress properly with non-HSI programs. 4. A Macintosh PICT file, if JPEG-compressed, will have a couple hundred bytes of header followed by a JFIF header (scan for 'JFIF'). Strip off everything before the FF D8 and you should be able to read it. 5. Anything else: it's a proprietary format, or not JPEG at all. If you are lucky, the file may consist of a header and a raw JPEG data stream. If you can identify the start of the JPEG data stream (look for FF D8), try stripping off everything before that. In uuencoded Usenet postings, the characteristic JFIF pattern is "begin" line M_]C_X ... whereas uuencoded HSI files will start with "begin" line M:'-I ... If you learn to check for the former, you can save yourself the trouble of downloading non-JFIF files. [12] What about arithmetic coding? The JPEG spec defines two different "back end" modules for the final output of compressed data: either Huffman coding or arithmetic coding is allowed. The choice has no impact on image quality, but arithmetic coding usually produces a smaller compressed file. On typical images, arithmetic coding produces a file 5 or 10 percent smaller than Huffman coding. (All the file-size numbers previously cited are for Huffman coding.) Unfortunately, the particular variant of arithmetic coding specified by the JPEG standard is subject to patents owned by IBM, AT&T, and Mitsubishi. Thus *you cannot legally use arithmetic coding* unless you obtain licenses from these companies. (The "fair use" doctrine allows people to implement and test the algorithm, but actually storing any images with it is dubious at best.) At least in the short run, I recommend that people not worry about arithmetic coding; the space savings isn't great enough to justify the potential legal hassles. In particular, arithmetic coding *should not* be used for any images to be exchanged on Usenet. There is some small chance that the legal situation may change in the future. Stay tuned for further details. [13] Does loss accumulate with repeated compression/decompression? It would be nice if, having compressed an image with JPEG, you could decompress it, manipulate it (crop off a border, say), and recompress it without any further image degradation beyond what you lost initially. Unfortunately THIS IS NOT THE CASE. In general, recompressing an altered image loses more information, though usually not as much as was lost the first time around. The next best thing would be that if you decompress an image and recompress it *without changing it* then there is no further loss, i.e., you get an identical JPEG file. Even this is not true; at least, not with the current free JPEG software. It's essentially a problem of accumulation of roundoff error. If you repeatedly compress and decompress, the image will eventually degrade to where you can see visible changes from the first-generation output. (It usually takes many such cycles to get visible change.) One of the things on our to-do list is to see if accumulation of error can be avoided or limited, but I am not optimistic about it. In any case, the most that could possibly be guaranteed would be that compressing the unmodified full-color output of djpeg, at the original quality setting, would introduce no further loss. Even such simple changes as cropping off a border could cause further roundoff-error degradation. (If you're wondering why, it's because the pixel-block boundaries move. If you cropped off only multiples of 16 pixels, you might be safe, but that's a mighty limited capability!) The bottom line is that JPEG is a useful format for archival storage and transmission of images, but you don't want to use it as an intermediate format for sequences of image manipulation steps. Use a lossless format (PPM, RLE, TIFF, etc) while working on the image, then JPEG it when you are ready to file it away. Aside from avoiding degradation, you will save a lot of compression/decompression time this way :-). [14] What are some rules of thumb for converting GIF images to JPEG? As stated earlier, you *will* lose some amount of image information if you convert an existing GIF image to JPEG. If you can obtain the original full-color data the GIF was made from, it's far better to make a JPEG from that. But if you need to save space and have only the GIF to work from, here are some suggestions for getting maximum space savings with minimum loss of quality. The first rule when converting a GIF library is to look at each JPEG, to make sure you are happy with it, before throwing away the corresponding GIF; that will give you a chance to re-do the conversion with a higher quality setting if necessary. Some GIFs may be better left as GIFs, as explained in section 3; in particular, cartoon-type GIFs with sixteen or fewer colors don't convert well. You may find that a JPEG file of reasonable quality will be *larger* than the GIF. (So check the sizes too.) Experience to date suggests that large, high-visual-quality GIFs are the best candidates for conversion to JPEG. They chew up the most storage so offer the most potential savings, and they convert to JPEG with least degradation. Don't waste your time converting any GIF much under 100 Kbytes. Also, don't expect JPEG files converted from GIFs to be as small as those created directly from full-color originals. To maintain image quality you may have to let the converted files be as much as twice as big as straight-through JPEG files would be (i.e., shoot for 1/2 or 1/3rd the size of the GIF file, not 1/4th as suggested in earlier comparisons). Many people have developed an odd habit of putting a large constant-color border around a GIF image. While useless, this was nearly free in terms of storage cost in GIF files. It is NOT free in JPEG files, and the sharp border boundary can create visible artifacts ("ghost" edges). Do yourself a favor and crop off any border before JPEGing. (If you are on an X Windows system, XV's manual and automatic cropping functions are a very painless way to do this.) cjpeg's default Q setting of 75 is appropriate for full-color input, but for GIF inputs, Q settings of 85 to 95 often seem to be necessary to avoid image degradation. (If you apply smoothing as suggested below, the higher Q setting may not be necessary.) Color GIFs of photographs or complex artwork are usually "dithered" to fool your eye into seeing more than the 256 colors that GIF can actually store. If you enlarge the image, you will see that adjacent pixels are often of significantly different colors; at normal size the eye averages these pixels together to produce the illusion of an intermediate color value. The trouble with dithering is that, to JPEG, it looks like high-spatial-frequency color noise; and JPEG can't compress noise very well. The resulting JPEG file is both larger and of lower image quality than what you would have gotten from JPEGing the original full color image (if you had it). To get around this, you want to "smooth" the GIF image before compression. Smoothing averages together nearby pixels, thus approximating the color that you thought you saw anyway, and in the process getting rid of the rapid color changes that give JPEG trouble. Appropriate use of smoothing will often let you avoid using a high Q factor, thus further reducing the size of the compressed file, while still obtaining a better-looking output image than you'd get without smoothing. With the V4 free JPEG software (or products based on it), a simple smoothing capability is built in. Try "-smooth 10" or so when converting GIFs. Values of 10 to 25 seem to work well for high-quality GIFs. Heavy-handed dithering may require larger smoothing factors. (If you can see regular fine-scale patterns on the GIF image even without enlargement, then strong smoothing is definitely called for.) Too large a smoothing factor will blur the output image, which you don't want. If you are an image processing wizard, you can also do smoothing with a separate filtering program, such as pnmconvol from the PBMPLUS package. However, cjpeg's built-in smoother is a LOT faster than pnmconvol... The upshot of all this is that "cjpeg -quality 85 -smooth 10" is probably a good starting point for converting GIFs. But if you really care about the image, you'll want to check the results and maybe try a few other settings. --------------------- For more information about JPEG in general or the free JPEG software in particular, contact the Independent JPEG Group at jpeg-info@uunet.uu.net.
7
4,894
Since the law requires that wiretaps be requested by the Executive Branch and approved by the Judicial Branch, it seems clear that one of the key registering bodies should be under the control of the Judicial Branch. I suggest the Supreme Court, or, regionally, the Courts of Appeal. More specifically, the offices of their Clerks. Courts already operate substantial record-keeping operations. Some of these records are confidential. So the concept of a court holding information in confidence in accordance with law has longstanding legal precedents. The judiciary is more immune to pressure from the executive branch than any executive branch agency or contractor can be. So judicial control of keys is appropriate. For the other half of the key, I suggest a unit of Congress, the General Accounting Office. The GAO is Congress's staff unit for keeping tabs on the Executive Branch, and has an excellent reputation. It's controlled strictly by Congress; the Executive Branch has no authority over it. With keys split between the Legislative and Judicial branches, we might have a chance of this system working honestly. If, of course, a way can be found to keep the keys from being siphoned off before they reach the repositories. This should not be construed as an endorsement by me of the whole Clipper concept. But if we have to have it, splitting control across all three branches of government might make it work.
3
4,895
=FLAME ON = =Reading through the posts about Kirlian (whatever spelling) =photography I couldn't help but being slightly disgusted by the =narrow-minded, "I know it all", "I don't believe what I can't see or =measure" attitude of many people out there. Where have you seen that attitude? =I am neither a real believer, nor a disbeliever when it comes to =so-called "paranormal" stuff; but as far as I'm concerned, it is just =as likely as the existence of, for instance, a god, which seems to be =quite accepted in our societies - without any scientific basis. =I am convinced that it is a serious mistake to close your mind to =something, ANYTHING, simply because it doesn't fit your current frame =of reference. History shows that many great people, great scientists, =were people who kept an open mind - and were ridiculed by sceptics. Fine, jackass. Suppose you point out even ONE aspect of Kirlian photography that's not explained by a corona discharge. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Carl J Lydick | INTERnet: CARL@SOL1.GPS.CALTECH.EDU | NSI/HEPnet: SOL1::CARL
9
4,896
"We however, shall be innocent of this sin, and will pray with earnest entreaty and supplication that the Creator of all may keep unharmed the numbers of His elect." -St. Clement, Bishop of Rome, Letter to the Corinthians, 59.2, (c. 90 AD) "Ignatius also called Theophorus, to the Church at Ephesus in Asia, which is worthy of all felicitation, blessed as it is with greatness by the fullness of God the Father, predestined from all eternity for a glory that is lasting and unchanging, united and chosen in true suffering by the will of the Father in Jesus Christ our God..." -St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians, Address, (c 110 AD) "We say therefore, that in substance, in concept, in orgin and in eminece, the ancient and Catholic Church is alone, gathering as it does into the unity of the one faith which results from the familiar covenants .... those already chosen, those predestined by God who knew before the foundation of the world that they would be just." -St. Clement, Patriarch and Archbishop of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 7.17.107.3, (c 205 AD) Of course the doctrine was explained more fully later on by Sts. Augustine, Aquinas, etc., but the seeds were ther from the beginning. I think you are reading it wrong. I say those who are not saved are not saved on account of their own sins. It is not because God did not give them sufficient grace, for He does do so, in His desire that all men might be saved. However, as only some are saved - and those who are saved are saved by the grace of God, "not by works, lest any man should boast" - the others are damned because of their obstinacy in refusing to heed the call of God. They are damned by their own free will and chosing, a choice forseen by God in His causing them to be not predestined, but reprobated instead. Certainly God does not distribute grace evenly. If He did, no one could have their heart hardened (or rather, harden their heart, thus causing God to withdraw His grace). But, you are correct - the world is divided into those who God knows to be saved, and those God knows to be on the road to perdition. THe key is that God knows it and we do not. Thus, no one can boast in complete assurance that they are one of the elect and predestined. But no one who is a Christian in good standin should doubt their salvation either (that shows a lack of trust in God). You must admit it is possible. Anyway, why would you want something in the hear and know, when you can recieve 100 fold in heaven? Better to lay up your treasure in heaven is what Jesus said. This is not to condemn the rich, but simply to point out that those who are rich are frequently very evil or immoral, so God must give them their blessing know, as they have chosen. Remeber, Jesus promised tribulation in this world, and hatred of others because we are Christians. He did not promise heaven on earth. He promised heaven. Not really. Unless you do penance here on earth, you will have to do it in Purgatory, as Paul pointed out (1 Corinthians 3.15). Those with poorer works, though still done with good intentions, will only be saved through fire (the damned will of course go into fire immeadiately, for whatever good they did was not for God but for self (dead works)). Of course, the Church gives indulgences, has Confession, and Annointing of the Sick to remove sin and the the vestiges of sin, so there is really little excuse for ending up in Purgatory - it is a last hope for the somewhat lazy and careless as I said above in referring to Paul. And no comments were taken as flames. You are one of the more polite people I have talked to over the net. Andy Byler
18
4,897
Then there are always osteopathy colleges....
9
4,898
There's an out for him. The announcement talked about strong cryptography I believe. Specifically: nor is the U.S. saying that "every American, as a matter of right, is entitled to an unbreakable commercial encryption product." Every vendor claims his product is unbreakable -- so this was sloppy wording. I am not claiming that we private citizens should have access to the NSA's best, secret algorithms. I don't want any NSA algorithms, actually. I'll let them break my pitiful amateur algorithms -- and RSA's. All I want is what I have already -- the ability and right to invent and use my own algorithms, share them with my friends and sell them.
3
4,899
One of the responsibilities of a licensed physician is to read the medical literature to keep up with changes in medical practice. All the clamor over laetril resulted in the NCI spending quite a bit of money on clinical trials which proved(to me anyway) that laetril was ineffective against cancer. A physician who continued to use it, when better, more effective, treatments are available, may deserve to be called a quack. Anti-fungals are in a different class. The big question seems to be is it reasonable to use them in patients with GI distress or sinus problems that *could* be due to candida blooms following the use of broad-spectrum antibiotics? Gorden Rubenfeld, through e-mail, has assured me that most physicians recognize the chance of candida blooms occuring after broad-spectrum antibiotic use and they therefore reinnoculate their patients with *good* bacteria to restore competetion for candida in the body. I do not believe that this is yet a standard part of medical practice. He deals with critical care patients where fungal infection(systemic) is a real problem and just because he tries to keep *good* bacteria in his patients does not mean that all physicians do this. I think that aspergillis is more likely to be found in the sinus mucus membranes than is candida. Women have been known for a very long time to suffer from candida blooms in the vagina and a women is lucky to find a physician who is willing to treat the cause and not give give her advise to use the OTC anti-fungal creams. Since candida colonizes primarily in the ano-rectal area, GI symptoms should be more common than vaginal problems after broad-spectrum antibiotic use. The problem we have here David is proof that GI discomfort can be caused by a candida bloom. The arguement is that without proof, no action is warrented. Medicine has not, and probalby never will be, practiced this way. There has always been the use of conventional wisdom. A very good example is kidney stones. Conventional wisdom(because clinical trails have not been done to come up with an effective prevention), was that restricitng the intake of calcium and oxalates was the best way to prevent kidney stones from forming. Clinical trials focused on drugs or ultrasonic blasts to breakdown the stone once it formed. Through the recent New England J of Medicine article, we now know that conventional wisdom was wrong, increasing calcium intake is better at preventing stone formation than is restricting calcium intake. The conventional wisdom in animal husbandry has been that animals need to be reinnoculated with *good* bacteria after coming off antibiotic therapy. If it makes sense for livestock, why doesn't it make sense for humans David? We are not talking about a dangerous treatment(unless you consider yogurt dangerous). If this were a standard part of medical practice, as Gordon R. says it is, then the incidence of GI distress and vaginal yeast infections should decline.
9