I found a bunch here that I don't use, and I keep up to date on this stuff. Here's the ones I'm going to check out:
Secunia PSI (to find out which software you haven't updated),
Open DNS (to protect from pharming),
GMER (to make sure your PC isn't a zombie),
Netcraft Toolbar (which could've helped out Julie Amero),
CCleaner (to clean up your system),
NoScript (to block scripts from websites you don't trust).
I don't need one, but I do know that if you need this sort of software that most companies will only let you have a crappy version for free, and make you pay about $25 for one that actually works, so it is good to know that FileShredder is out there when you need it.
It turns out that Congress has gone after the President about firing attorneys before.
But, it was 1885, the Congress was Republican, and the President was a Democrat.
Nothing came of it because there really isn't anything that could or should have come of it.
And there won't be anything this time either, because the Democrats are bluffing. They certainly have an issue, a position, and an opponent, but the problem is they don't have a case. If they did, they'd take the White House to court. The fact that they haven't suggests that they don't think they can win - they're not exactly bringing it on, are they?
Instead, we have a lot of rotten tomatoes being thrown.
contempt citations are, rather, an audacious break with history and Mr.
Conyers has far more honorable options. The reason Democrats haven't
pursued those more dignified routes is because this is about smearing
the president, not proving a principle.
Let's remember how we got here. ... Democrats latched on
to the firings in hopes of building some case ... The Justice Department, in the spirit
of cooperation, turned over 8,500 documents ... Conyers and ... Leahy, found nothing. So they then demanded
the White House turn over privileged communications ... Bush invoked
executive privilege ...
... This is a straightforward battle between Mr. Bush's
claim of executive privilege and Congress's claim of oversight. Both
sides, in theory, have a legitimate case.
... Mr. Bush has just as much right to grant himself a
similar power and hold Mr. Conyers in criminal contempt for interfering
in executive-branch business.
... If Messrs. Conyers and Leahy think the White
House is wrong to refuse to comply with Congress's subpoenas, they can
file a civil legal proceeding in court. The judiciary will then decide
... It's not complicated.
... Mr. Conyers hasn't pursued a
civil case is that his legal staff has informed him that he has a very
poor chance of winning. Legal precedent strongly suggests that Mr.
Bush's assertion of executive privilege is valid here ...
The New York Times has a policy to use the term "Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia" instead of "Al Qaeda in Iraq". The conservative blogosphere has had a field day with the use of a deprecated name to emphasize their view that the Iraq conflict has nothing to do with Al Qaeda. (Perhaps they're right, but it seems to me that this is the sort of nomenclature a historian would use after the dust has settled and the point has been proved rather than what journalists are required to use when the question is still open).
Anyway ... I laughed so hard when I read this:
If The New York Times keeps using the ancient term "Mesopotamia" in reference
to modern-day Iraq, perhaps we should start using the word "Persia" to describe
the region we now call Iran.
We could call Turkey the "Ottomans." And we could call Syria "Sargon."
We might even be able to slip in the term "Babylon" to describe parts of
Iraq and Saudi Arabia.
This can be so much fun!
But I guess we would have to call Israel "Israel."
Gosh ... sounds like a policy intended to emphasize the politically incorrect fact that Jews have the oldest claim to a patch of earth in the region.
That's been the question on our deck after 10 PM the last few nights.
I said Antares of Betelgeuse.
It turns out that you can get star charts from Wunderground (the link is hard to find on their main page, so go here). Just put in your zip code and the time you'll be looking and you'll get a chart that's, frankly, much more than the typical person needs.
I'm thinking now that we're seeing Jupiter. It isn't as red as Antares, but it is close by right now, and much brighter.
It isn't PC, but this letter to the editor by Peter Altman makes some points that any serious analysis of terrorism must confront:
... Poverty isn't the main motivating factor behind terrorism, but he is
wrong in stating that a lack of civil liberties and political rights is
the real culprit ("Capital: Princeton Economist Says Lack of Civil Liberties, Not Poverty, Breeds Terrorism,"
July 5). Mr. Krueger looks at the list of major terrorist-producing
states and sees a lack of freedom and democracy as the common
denominator. However, there are too many authoritarian states that
don't produce terrorists for his hypothesis to be true. Neither North
Koreans nor Cubans are busy blowing themselves up in cafés.
The common denominator among all major terrorist
producing states is Islam ... it is the caustic sense of humiliation among many
Muslims over Western ascendancy that actually lights the fuse. Muslims
are raised on the belief that Islam, the perfect faith, is superior to
all other religions and that the only reason that Islam is not
ascendant is that the West is undermining it.
Until self-criticism and a recognition of Western
scientific superiority resulting from the triumph of science over
orthodoxy is embraced by Islamic civilization from North Africa to the
Indian Ocean, we need look no further for an explanation.
I know and like a lot of thoughtful Moslems who will disagree with aspects of this argument, as is their right. But ... they all live here. I've also known a great many students from Moslem countries, and generally they'll do just about anything to avoid going back there.
... In this experiment, an author can submit under a 'no revisions' policy. This policy means exactly what it says: if you submit under no revisions, I (or the co-editor) will either accept or reject. What will not happen is a request for a revision.
I will ask referees: 'is it better for Economic Inquiry to publish the paper as is, versus reject it, and why or why not?' ...
FTNITK #1: Economic Inquiry is a general interest journal that -as a Western rather than national outlet - resides in the second tier of rankings. As such, it is a very, very good second tier journal and probably the best regionally-oriented journal.
FTNITK #2: R. Preston McAfee is on a lot of folks medium-sized list for a Nobel Prize. He's not a lock, and he's young enough that it won't come soon, but he's published a ton of stuff that is not only good, but whose implications are still poorly and incompletely understood by the profession at large (me included).
The big difference between faith and science is that in the former you support your null hypothesis with evidence that is consistent with it, while in the latter you retain your null hypothesis because you haven't yet found any evidence that is inconsistent with it.
With the development of internet technology, work at home jobs are increasing in the market. Also setting up small business online with ones own bank savings can provide excellent work at home opportunities. Apart from savings, banks offer0 credit card to cater to short term finance needs. Partial tax payments like tax credits are also available to promote online businesses. Market now offers several alternatives to traditional credit card debt which are helpful to work at home businesses.