grantarctic1 Never caught one Neels, but off the stones around Esperance ive seen some schools swim in and out of our burrly trail. Great looking fish in the water, I would like to hook one even on a spin stick, to get one on fly would be awsome, they look like very fast fish . Paul Cunningham I nailed a monster out at NW reef of Exmouth a few years ago. We were working around birds and had them chase down a clouser at full pace. It pulled the scales down to 8kg which is a bit bigger than the usual suspects. I will see if I can find a photo and chuck it up. crasny1 a fairly uncommon catch, and probably not targetable. If they are there, go for it, if not, well go for something else. Paul that one off yours is "massive" compared to the 2 I have caught years ago off the Murion Islands trolling on a charter. They were immediately rigged by the deckies as "Marlin Lollies" but no joy on that front. The 2 I had was half that size mate, and I had a fight on a trolling broom stick, ie poor buggers didnt stand a chance. Would love to hook one light, then dance the merry dance, whether spin or fly. I think not, but they are very seriola looking. Are they family off Sambo's, Ambo's and YTK's?? Help Glenn or other knowledgables. I have to start work so to lazy googling!!!! soupster51 I wouldn't say I've caught them regularly but I caught a few. The things I've learnt: They seem to like structure either reef, FADs, log, etc. They school up in massive numbers so if you get one as by-catch and you want more they are generally there for the taking if you want them. Most effective lure for me is the small fly-like skirted lures that we use for smaller tuna species.


Go back to Windows 7 or XP operating system If you decide to go back to your previous operating system, you'll need to reinstall it from the recovery or installation media that came with your PC, which is typically DVD media. If you don?t have recovery media, you might be able to create it from a recovery partition on your PC using software provided by your PC manufacturer. Check the support section of your PC manufacturer?s website for more information. After you install Windows 8, you won?t be able to use the recovery partition on your PC to go back to your previous version of Windows. Re: Go back to Windows 7 or XP operating system If you planned properly prior to installing your copy of Win 8 CP, you created a system Image of your Win XP or Win 7 OS. This will allow you to restore your original OS in about 10 minutes. Think about that, 10 minutes to be back on your original OS exactly where it was when you installed your Win 8 CP. Re: Go back to Windows 7 or XP operating system Originally Posted by Whs If you decide to go back to your previous operating system, you'll need to reinstall it from the recovery or installation media that came with your PC, which is typically DVD media. If you don?t have recovery media, you might be able to create it from a recovery partition on your PC using software provided by your PC manufacturer. Check the support section of your PC manufacturer?s website for more information. After you install Windows 8, you won?t be able to use the recovery partition on your PC to go back to your previous version of Windows. That's what I found out too, I couldn't use the recovery partition any longer after installing Windows 8 CP. Fortunately, and I learned this the hard, painful way 3 years ago, was to backup before making any major changes. And also to make a backup when the computer is new, after all crapware is removed, system updated & favorite apps installed. This way, I can go back to a "fresh install" anytime that I wish to. Every month, I backup my computers, prior to Update Tuesday. I do it before, so that if an update screws up my system, I have a fallback option. There are several free backup software options to use, such as Macrium, Todo 4 (which also does file backups) & Paragon has a freebie too, but haven't used that one. There's no excuse not to backup, given all of the options that we have. As far as a backup drive goes, it doesn't have to be fancy (or expensive). Many of us has upgraded our hard drives to increase capacity, these lower capacity drives makes for good backup drives. Enclosures for hard drives (make sure that the right kind is selected) can be found at Newegg for a reasonable price. USB3 enclosures will cost a bit more than USB2, but the speed will be there. I have both a USB2 enclosure (Vantec brand) & a USB3 Ineo docking station. 2.5 & 3.5 SATA drives will fit in the docking station. Neither cost more than $30, with free shipping. The Windows 8 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.


Almost a quarter of Republicans think Obama 'may be the Antichrist' as 14 states sue over healthcare reforms Americans who suggest Barack Obama should rot in hell are apparently deadly serious. Nearly a quarter of Republicans believe the Democrat president 'may be the Antichrist', according to a survey. An even greater number compared him to Hitler. Just another boys' club: Barack Obama, centre on the phone, is surrounded by male aides at the White House as they plot healthcare reform this week in a new image released today. The President has been compared to the Antichrist Mr Obama was jubilant this week after securing his 626billion healthcare reform plan. But his triumph seems only to have inflamed his critics among the evangelical Christians from America's heartland who kept George Bush in power for eight years and have demonised his successor. More than half of the Republicans quizzed by Harris Poll, 57 per cent, believed the president was secretly Muslim, something he has consistently denied. And 67 per cent of Republicans who responded believed Obama was a socialist, despite his central leanings. The startling results came as lawyers representing 14 U.S. states filed lawsuits yesterday challenging an overhaul of the country's $2.5trillion healthcare system, minutes after President Barack Obama signed the landmark legislation. One joint lawsuit by a dozen Republican attorneys general and a Democrat claims the sweeping reforms violate state-government rights in the U.S. Constitution and will force massive new spending on hard-pressed state governments. Virginia went to court separately, while Missouri Republican Lieutenant Governor Peter Kinder said he would like to join the suit. The joint suit, led by Florida, was filed with a federal court in Pensacola, according to the office of Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum. In addition to McCollum, the Republican attorneys general from Alabama, Colorado, Idaho, Michigan, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Washington joined the suit. The lawsuit says the law - which expands government health plans for the poor, imposes new taxes on the wealthy and requires insurers to cover people with pre-existing medical conditions - violates the Constitution's commerce clause by requiring nearly all Americans to buy health insurance. Mr McCollum said: 'It forces people to do something - in the sense of buying a healthcare policy or paying a penalty, a tax or a fine - that simply the Constitution does not allow Congress to do.' Mr McCollum, who is seeking the Republican nomination to run for Florida governor, said the healthcare reforms would add $1.6billion to Florida's spending on the Medicaid health program for the poor. The Justice Department, which is responsible for defending U.S. law in court, pledged to vigorously fight any challenges to the new healthcare law. 'We are confident that this statute is constitutional and we will prevail,' said Justice spokesman Charles Miller. The White House agreed the suits would fail. 'There have been hearings about the constitutionality of the law, and I think there's pretty much widespread agreement that it is constitutional,' Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the White House Office of Health Reform, said. 'I think we have governors who might be aiming for higher office who are starting to just send a message.' The suits were filed just moments after Mr Obama signed the healthcare reforms into law. But on the most historic occasion of his presidency so far, vice-president Joe Biden managed to put his foot in it. Gaffe-prone Mr Biden inadvertently broadcast the F-word to America after he introduced the President to sign his much vaunted health reform bill into law yesterday. After hugging Mr Obama at a a ceremony in the White House, Mr Biden leaned in and whispered in the President's ear: 'This is a big f****** deal.' The remark was caught on microphones recording the event that was shown live across the country. By last night, the clip was being replayed all over the internet. White House aides seemed to be unembarrassed, with press secretary Robert Gibbs later tweeting: 'Yes, Mr Vice-President, you're right.' Comments ( 315 ) Re: I feel sorry for those who called yourself "allies" ... this guy is pro-terrorists, pro-abortion (by the way, now I am going to pay for YOUR abortions, all you have to do is come to the US!!!) . This guy is anti-american, he is a traitor. - Ana, Boston, MA, 24/3/2010 5:34 Such harsh words for a president who hasn't screwed up this country half as much as W Bush, crazy that he even had a second chance to do such a crappy job. Sure Obama is not a saint, but he is far from a traitor or the ant-christ or hitler (hmmm has he killed hordes of people under the guise of religion?!) blah blah blah. People grow up, he is trying to work with a broken system that failed the masses...at least someone was grown enough to actually tackle this "healthcare" system that has allowed many Americans to die for absolutely no reason. "center leanings"???? Are you out of your mind?!?!?! Obama is the left most president in HISTORY!!!! What are you smoking!?!?!?!!? Obama is an unabashed socialist. He is NOT a centrist in ANY definition of the word. He is roundly HATED in the U.S. by the productive component of the population. Sure, the leeches LOVE him - why wouldn't they? But those of us who produce, own businesses, work hard, we all HATE the evil little punk. 1861 Obama also killed America's Space Program.....Soviets wanted to do this for decades..... This will put the U.S.A. in debt of up to 9 Trillions Dollars....wonder how much taxes are going to be raised??? Barry Soetero brings this on himself: 1. Changed his name inexplicably to Barak Hussein Obama; 2. Full birth records are sealed and over $1M spent to prevent disclosure; 3. College records likewise under lock and key, so no way of knowing if he truly attended Occidental, Harvard, or whereever else he wants us to believe he attended; 4. Travelled to Pakistan during a time when Americans were not permitted to do so, subjecting him to relinquishment of passport rights; 5. Claims to be a "Christian" but will never say exactly what makes him one; 6. Attended a white-hating, angry, anti-American church; 7. Studied Islam during his formative years; 8. Bows to Arab (Islamic) royalty; 9. Can recite Islamic prayers perfectly; 10. Kneels in prayer in a Mosque; 11. He lies. Frequently. 12. Came to power in the US Senate by eliminating his opponents rather than beating them at the polls; 13. Surrounds himself with similar ethically-challenged people and appoints immoral degenerates. Obama is a Marxist. Nancy Pelosi is a far left-winger, so absorbed in controlling the populace, that she would sell her soul to the devil. The pieces for the anti-christ's appearance are not in place yet, though Obama has set himself up as the Messah--not just here, but around the world. Obama has stated in one interview that he is a Muslim first----when a man says that he's Muslim, one doesn't have to "think" it. The American people have given a terrorist the keys to the White House-and he is destroying America. I have to wonder why no one has stopped him. "And 67 per cent of Republicans who responded believed Obama was a socialist, despite his central leanings." Despite his central leanings? What idiot wrote that piece of twaddle? Name a single "central leaning" the man has demonstrated. All we have are his words, his actions, and his unverifiable history. And those are all hard left. There's nothing "center" about Barry Soetoro in his past, present, or the future he's inflicting on America. Alright, I'm not into religion and I'm not an evangelist...however, I say God bless McCullum! Obama is a socialist and is destroying America. Look at the polls...Americans do NOT want this legislation rammed down their throats! He doesn't seem to care, does he? However, how on earth can you call a man the Anti-Christ for wanting to extend healthcare to more people? Yes you may have to pay more in taxes but a little selflessness never did anyone any harm! I don't recall Democrats calling George Bush the Anti-Christ even when he was (illegally) blowing Iraq to smithereens. - Angee, Coventry, 24/3/2010 14:18 Since when is abortion healthcare? And why should God fearing people pay for the abortions or low lifes who use it like birth control? I think it kind of puts Obama and Bush side by side. George Bush couldn't think for himself...his staff ran the show he just acted in it...Obama is very smart, knows what he is talking about and believes in the changes he is calling for. AntiChrist might be a little overdramatic but its the exact opposite of God fearing.


Showcase Main menu You are here The Gatekeeper Both those who were coming and those who were going had to cross the gatekeeper on their way. The passage he guarded was at the middle of a very long road, and he did not know of any other part of the road but his own. He used to ask travelers what lay farther down on either side, but they all said his was the only gate, and eventually he had come to believe them. Now he only asked them their names and gave them what they needed, depending on where they were going. The exchange was usually brief, because the gate itself was brief, and the travelers could not stop if they were ever going to get anywhere on such a long road. Most of them were already far away and had forgotten about the gatekeeper. Some even denied the rumors and said there was no gatekeeper. Still, the gatekeeper did not mind; he was used to being alone. There was a book the gatekeeper read from as he waited and he had been reading from this book for a long while when a traveler approached. The gatekeeper asked the man his name and the man was slow to answer. " Death ?" asked the gatekeeper. The man looked at him strangely and remained silent. "Many have said in passing here that Death comes for everyone, but he has never come for me." The gatekeeper closed his book and continued, "They say only that he wears a watch, and that he always comes." The man shook his head. He held out his arms and pushed up his sleeves, revealing his wrists; he wore no watch on either arm. The gatekeeper nodded and then he sighed. "What is in the bag," he asked the man. "Fortune, I hope." The gatekeeper smiled. Then he narrowed his eyes. "No clocks?" "I hope not." The gatekeeper smiled again. He reopened his book because he kept his list in between two of the pages. He took it out and wrote a name down for the man. "You will not want to come back," the gatekeeper cautioned. "I hope not." The gatekeeper slid the list back inside and closed the book. His eyebrows lifted slightly and he looked at the face of the man curiously. "What makes you go?" he asked. "Fortune, I hope." The gatekeeper smiled and shook his head as if at a boy he was fond of. He raised his arm up slowly and opened his large hand. "Your bag please," he said. The man looked sad but he did as he was asked. "Sorry," the gatekeeper said. "You can't take anything with you." There was a large pile of dusty bags to the side of the gate and the gatekeeper tossed this one on top. Then he handed the man a watch. "Sorry," he said. The man looked disappointed but shrugged a smile. The gatekeeper opened the gate with his key. "You may go now," he said. "Good luck," called the man as he stepped forward. "Not yet," said the gatekeeper as he turned back the time on his watch. *** There was a book the gatekeeper read from as he waited and he had been reading from this book for a long while when a traveler approached. The gatekeeper asked the man his name and the man was slow to answer. He examined his list and the eyes of the man rolled about as the gatekeeper scrolled. His fingers trembled up and down his sides and his legs seemed either about to flee or fall over. "Here it is," the gatekeeper said. He looked up and smiled at the man. He had stopped moving. "This way," the gatekeeper said. He opened the gate and stood aside for the man to pass. The man stood still where he was. "Aren't I early?" he asked. "No, you must be on time." The gatekeeper continued smiling and pointed to the man's watch. The man looked down at it and then back up at the gatekeeper. "It's a mistake," he said. "I must be early." The gatekeeper shrugged and withdrew his hand. "You may leave your bag over there," he said. "Can't you check the list over," the man said. "Isn't it possible there was a mistake? I couldn't have walked so quickly." The gatekeeper shrugged again. "There is no mistake I could have made," he said. "If you walk on the road at all you will eventually arrive. And if you are here now, then now is the time you must have arrived." "I should have gone more slowly," the man said. He dropped his bag along one of the piles on his side of the gate. "If I had stopped, I would have seen more." "If you had stopped, then you would not have gotten far enough to see anything." "But I am afraid," the man said. The gatekeeper shrugged again but now he did not bother answering. The man sunk his shoulders and dropped his face as he stepped onto the path beyond the gate. The gatekeeper took up his list and erased the man's name. *** There was a book the gatekeeper read from as he waited and he had been reading from this book for a long while when a traveler approached. The gatekeeper asked the man his name and the man was slow to answer. He wore a mask but it looked less like a mask and more like a missing face. " Death ?" asked the gatekeeper. "I am an artist," said the man. Something about the man was smiling and the gatekeeper thought it might be the mask that was smiling. "I must ask for your mask," he said. "You know it is no mask." The man pointed to the book in the gatekeeper's hands. "I am an artist," he said. The gatekeeper waited a moment looking at the man. Then he closed his book. He raised his arm up slowly and opened his large hand. "Only faces," he said. "And so it is," the man answered. "May I pass?" The gatekeeper shook his head and held his arm where it was. "You must have a face to be on that side of the road." "My face is on that side of the road," the man said. "I am an artist." "Then count yourself lucky," the gatekeeper answered. "None can take anything with them, and few can leave anything behind. But if you do leave something behind, then you cannot go back. For if you could go back, then you would not have left something behind." "I did not leave my name behind," the man said. "None do. That is what allows you to start over on this side. A man with nothing is like a boy." "But the gatekeeper gives names," said the man. "Perhaps you can write another for me on your list." "It would not be your name," said the gatekeeper. "For your name was already given to you, and I cannot remember it." There was no longer a smile about the man and the gatekeeper could not tell how long ago it disappeared; it seemed almost a different mask that the man was wearing. He took off the mask and turned around. *** There was a book the gatekeeper read from as he waited and he had been reading from this book for a long while when a traveler approached. The gatekeeper asked the man his name and the man was slow to answer. "I am still only a boy," he said. The gatekeeper knew that they all wanted to be boys, that they all could think they were boys. He could understand this. "I want to return home," said the boy. "Is this the way?" "What home?" asked the gatekeeper. All the travelers walked on the road to get somewhere, but none of them ever walked to get home. The gatekeeper could not understand this. "You can't take anything with you," he said. The boy laughed as boys do and the gatekeeper wondered if he could understand where he was coming from. "I am only a boy," he said. "Boys have nothing." The gatekeeper had to give boys their things. Sometimes he did not want to because sometimes he wanted to be boy. "You want your home?" the gatekeeper asked. The boy smiled. "Take this." The gatekeeper removed the list from the book and closed it. Then he raised it up and held it out for the boy. "Here," he said. "Take this." "What is it?" asked the boy. "It is a story," the gatekeeper said. "I like stories." "An artist wrote it a very long time ago," the gatekeeper said. "It was about his home. Maybe it can help you find yours if you do not know where to go." The boy smiled and went through the gate. The gatekeeper hoped that sometime he would come back, though he did not think he would. *** All those who had been on the road had names, but few of them were remembered and only those names that were remembered could be on the gatekeeper's list. The list was very long, just as the road was very long, and the gatekeeper had been reading over this list when a traveler approached. He asked the man his name and the man was slow to answer. He pushed his sleeve up and revealed a watch around his wrist. He looked down at it and then he looked back at the gatekeeper. "Sorry," said the man. " Death ?" asked the gatekeeper. The man shrugged a smile. "Sorry," he said. He took his other hand out from his pocket and raised it up slowly before the gatekeeper. "Your key," said the man. The gatekeeper took his key out from his pocket and dropped it into the man's hands. "And your list." The gatekeeper did the same with the list. "Sorry," said the man. "You have been a long time in coming," said the gatekeeper. "So have you," said the man. He smiled and pointed to the gatekeeper's watch. "You can keep that," he said. The gatekeeper looked down at his watch and nodded. Then he looked back up at the man. "I am afraid," he said. "I have not been on the road." "That is how it should be," said the man. "Many are afraid of the gate, but crossing the gate is easy. It is the road that one should be afraid of, for it is only on the road that a traveler can fail to leave something behind." He smiled again and the gatekeeper tried smiling with him. Then he opened the gate with the gatekeeper's key. "Good luck," said the man, as he took his place before the gate. The gatekeeper sighed and then stepped away through the gate. The man wrote the gatekeeper's name down on the list and turned on his watch. Then he opened his book. He had been reading from this book for a long while when a traveler approached.


It is the Time to Remember The unfulfilled Promises In the wake of a democratic hiatus of 32 years, on 14 April 2003, and the third time in as many years that Somaliland had been given the opportunity to express their preferences at the ballot box. These bold steps towards the democratisation set Somaliland apart from the rest of Somalia Republic -- which has become by word a collapsed State since the downfall of Major General Mohamed Siyad Barre's tyrannical regime in 1991. The outgoing President of Somaliland, Riyale, had previously been a deputy President in late President Egal's administration until latter's death on May 3, 2002 -- and was hand picked by late President of Somaliland, Mohamed Haji Ibrahim Egal to supersede his predecessor, Mr. Abdurrahman Aw Ali Farah, who has been one of the highly respected of SNM high ranking officials -- and who hails from Awdal region. The elections held in the country, Riyale became the Somaliland's first democratically elected head of State, and his democratic election has gone into the history books -- something which is rare commodity in Africa, let alone in the Arab world. These democratic polls that materialised throughout Somaliland have been welcomed by the international observers and described them as free and fair and were in line with the internationally recognised electoral norms. As per their view, nothing that could have altered the outcome of the election was found out, but generally it was free and fair and peaceful. On the eve of the Presidential polls, Riyale as UDUB's candidature for Presidency -- had made a host of pledges and made it clear to the people of Somaliland that his campaign speeches would be fulfilled in order to live up to the people's expectations. But on the contrary, Riyale administration failed to keep its words and none of its promises had been implemented. However, we will here zero in on some of Riyale's unfulfilled campaign promises and will be discussed in detail. Judicial reforms In mid -- 2002, Riyale declared judicial reforms as one of his top priorities, and ordered a bold shake-up of the justice system. The initiative was unpopular with the sitting judges, but was warmly welcomed by a public exasperated by the judiciary's deterioration to state of "an open market where justice is sold to the highest bidder." As part of reform, Riyale appointed a new Chief Justice Saeed Farah Ahmed and established an advisory Committee on Judiciary, which six judges described as unconstitutional and subsequently resigned, Riyale then sacked the four remaining members to the Apex bench.  Therefore, in April 2003 when Supreme Court was called to hand down judgment on the National Election Commission's decision, there were justices on the bench, all of them appointed by Riyale. A recent report by a local research organisation found the judiciary to "the most neglected and under-funded of the three orders of the government" and described its application of a law as "ad hoc, non -- uniform, and highly subjective." And the judiciary remained mired in stagnation and corruption and failed to meet to the people's expectations. Corruption is Rife in the Country Corruption in Somaliland is rampant and the State fund is willfully embezzled by the Riyale administration. The most corrupt officials in the government of the day are the ministries who are the remnant of Siyad Barre military regime and his uneducated kitchen cabinet -- who are said to be the Riyale's main advisers and the President himself. It is not everybody's guest that the outgoing President of Somaliland and his Faqash remnant ministries misappropriated tents and thousands of US bucks and have stashed away in a foreign accounts, while Somaliland people are in a state of poverty and unemployment coupled with the prevailing basic amenities in the country. The taxpayers do not fall behind with the government's tax but they pay instantaneously as they are law biding citizens of the country, and are well aware of that the government cannot function without the tax. But the main problem is that the Somalilanders failed the government of the day be held accountable to what the tax levied from them -- have been done with -- and this lack of accountability on the party of the taxpayers since there is not a watchdog institution -- has led taxpayers' money to end up in the pockets of those corrupt ministries and other unpatriotic officials in the Riyale administration. And this has compounded the prevailing difficulties in which the common man was living in. Diplomatic Relations with Djibouti Shortly after Riyale had been sworn in as the interim President of Somaliland, he visited Djibouti instead of Somaliland's friend -- Ethiopia, claiming that he wanted to mend fences with the neighbouring client State of Djibouti and in the wake of his return to the country he told at a press conference that he normalised the strained diplomatic relations with Djibouti. Surprisingly, Djibouti did not refrain from its decentralised hate campaign against the Somaliland's independence despite Riyale's close relations with the Djibouti, and it defiantly continued its lobby against the Somaliland's existence. The Djibouti's decentralised hate crusade has invited angry reactions from Somaliland's different quarters living in and outside of the country; they launched into diatribes against the Riyale's stand on the Djibouti's deliberate campaign against the sovereignty of Somaliland. Reconstruction of Berbera Cement factory President Riyale continued his unfulfilled pledges even in the aftermath of his successful election. And wherever he went he promised the earth -- something which he was not going to do. In the recent past, he paid a deluge of visits to the coastal town of Berbera, and the Berbera inhabitants who overwhelmingly voted his ruling party -- UDUB to power gave him and his visiting delegation a chilly reception on account of his unfulfilled promises in which President Riyale made earlier. While he has been visiting there he laid a foundation stone at the Berber's forsaken Cement factory -- and has undertaken that its reconstruction will soon be implemented by his administration in order to alleviate the unemployment that bedeviled not only the people of Berbera but also the entire community of Somaliland in which 80 per cent are in a state of joblessness. On hearing this undertaking made by the Riyale administration -- the general public did not give any importance to it -- because it was not for the first time Riyale administration made such promises, which are only for vote bank politics -- something the people rose above. The prevalent unemployment in the country The unemployment prevailing in Somaliland is very much widespread, and the number of the youth being churned out by the growing universities in the country is skyrocketing year by year; with large number of Somaliland youth graduating from the overseas universities returning to the country -- are compounding the unemployment that already haunting the domestic graduates in the Somaliland. Be it the educated youth graduated from the overseas or those graduated from the universities in the country -- have now realised that the Riyale administration does not have job creation strategy for them nor it is in his radar to address the prevalent unemployment that the educated youth are encountering today. The educated youth go to the Arab world in quest of an employment, while others resorted to migrate to the Western world by endangering their dear lives through the desert between Sudan and Libya, and then the dangerous Mediterranean Sea between Libya and Italy in order to get better living standard. The youth are the only national asset we have and yet the Riyale administration willfully neglected and failed to utilize them. In his speeches, he had never mentioned whether he had a deliberate strategy towards the youth of the country -- who completely lost their confidence in which they reposed in his outgoing administration. Despite his administration's underachievement and his failure on every front, and with the lack of basic amenities in the country, Riyale and his henchmen are intentionally embezzling the state funds by lavishly travelling every corner and cranny of the world, without explaining the objectives behind their fruitless constant travels to the elected legislative council of Somaliland. His failure and regular lies being told to the general public -- would do a great disservice to his desire for his re-election in the forthcoming presidential polls. Berbera Port Forsaken Given that Berbera port is Somaliland's economic nerve centre on which the economic of the country is largely depends on -- and yet Riyale deliberately transferred the Somaliland's livestock to the port of the neighbouring Djibouti to be exported there -- and the reason why Riyale has been sabotaging the economy of Somaliland was that he wanted to show his allegiance to his counterpart of Djibouti, who is ironically against the Somaliland's sovereignty. But this move has angered the livestock traders on which their livelihoods were depended upon the trade of Somaliland's livestock. Also, this move has consistently been criticized by the opposition parties as well as the intellectual people of the country who described it as an act of high treason and unpatriotic and that the Riyale administration will be held accountable when the right time comes. And the Berbera port is almost deserted by the Somaliland traders and shifted to the neighbouring port of Bosaaso, where they are given concession and warm welcome. The Capital City lacks basic amenities The eight years Riyale administration has been in office are proven in many respects failure, initially, the people of Somaliland hailed Riyale as the Somaliland's new messiah, who would bring about a far-reaching change -- a change that every single body expected more or less prior to his election. But unfortunately the people's hopes were dashed due to his inconsistency and lack of visionary; the people of Somaliland started to be sniffy about his unfulfilled promises, which are meant for political gains. Riyale administration has done no improvement in the capital to speak of, let alone the other parts of the country which remained neglected; the capital city of Hargeisa lacks all sorts of basic amenities as well as the other necessary public infrastructure. Given the size of the population estimated to be one million or so is mounting day by day due to the ruralites migrating to the city and the city dwellers are extremely bedeviled by the prevailing scarcity of water caused by the mismanagement on the part of the Hargeisa water agency -- which is a stone's throw or walkable distance, where our outgoing  President of Somaliland who is entrusted with the responsibility of the running the entire country lives and he is yet to be unaware of what is happening there. And the common man is sharply complaining about the growing shortage of water and common man's grievances on the scarcity of water are fallen on deaf ears, and the Riyale administration dragged its feet to address the people's suffering. The other basic needs which is worth mentioning here is the lack of healthcare in the city, which every single facility had to be made available so as to the people in the country make use of it. There is only one hospital to speak of in the entire city that is run by the government. Similarly, in the other towns, there is only one public hospital. And the medicines donated by the humanitarian agencies operating in the country to cure the people who cannot afford to buy are on the market and are sold to the private clinics in the city to make out of money, and our dear President with whom we entrusted the entire responsibility of the country was sitting absentmindedly while these episodes were unfolding under his watchful eye. Riyale failed to secure Recognition Riyale extensively travelled to the West and many countries in Africa in his eight years in office claming he has been in quest of diplomatic recognition for Somaliland. And he became the most travelled President Somaliland ever had during its independence, and whenever he returned to the country he would tell to the people of Somaliland that Somaliland is on the brink of recognition and be granted its much sought recognition sooner or later by the countries visited by him. Most importantly, he failed to use his good offices to secure a diplomatic recognition from the neighbouring client State of Djibouti, which Riyale consistently reiterated that it is the Somaliland's best and sincere friend in the region. The Djibouti government has never been Somaliland's friend in the region and it widely campaigned how to undermine the Somaliland's effort to obtain recognition from the regional grouping and the West. Riyale's extensive travels have been for personal and were nothing to do with the national interest -- and security blanket was thrown around his visits by his administration yet his political shenanigans were exposed in the Somaliland media, which acts as a watchdog to protect the national interest of the country. The eight years Riyale has been in power he is said to have been busy amassing the national wealth and stashing away in foreign accounts and he willfully neglected his responsibility with which he had been entrusted as President of Somaliland yet he is shamelessly seeking fresh mandate from the same people whose their expectations were not lived up to by his administration. And the people are now consumed by anger and are bent on to topple his failed regime at the ballot box because it is the time to remember the unfulfilled promises made by the failed outgoing Riyale administration and no more fairy tale entertainments.


A new coronavirus, should you care? I doubt you have missed the news but a new virus that infects (and has  so far killed one person) has just been discovered in the last few months. The virus in question is believed to be a new - never before seen in the wild - kind of virus (a new coronavirus to be more precise), so we really have little clues as to how it behaves as not much work has been done. Schematic of a coronavirus - this new virus probably looks a lot like this. From Biowiki. We only have two examples of human infections with this new virus to go on but despite this, the BBC and other media outlets have sparked confusion (and maybe panic) by comparing it to the 2002 SARS coronavirus (whose case fatality rate was around 10% of those over eight thousand or so people infected), which proved to be a much more deadly affair. What they probably should have compared it to is the common cold coronavirus, known as 229E - an equally valid example. But this misses the point, it is all speculation really at this minute in time. We should really wait for the hard facts to emerge. So what do we actually know? What's happened so far? We first became aware of this new virus (it doesn't have a name yet - nor is there any published material on it - that's how new it is) a few months back when the Erasmus Medical Centre in the Netherlands discovered the virus in a fatal case of lung disease from a Saudi national. A couple of weeks ago, it was spotted again, this time in a Qatari citizen travelling from Saudi Arabia and Qatar. So far this man has not died (he's in intensive care in the UK) but he was suffering from 'acute respiratory syndrome and renal failure' when he was airlifted to the UK and their Health Protection Agency identified the virus. By sequencing the virus's genome, the UK team confirmed it was highly similar to the Dutch sequenced one. However, this sequence has not yet been published so we don't know how this relates to the hundreds of thousands of other coronaviruses out there. As you can predict, with such a limited understanding of this virus there are many, many questions about it. These are important questions that ultimately impact on public health and no doubt these will be answered in the coming months. What is a coronavirus? These coronaviruses are rather large and encased within a fatty membrane and have a very, very large genome (around 30,000 nucleotides) made up of RNA with positive sense polarity. Encoded within this massive genome are ten genes that produce a lot more proteins due to some viral tricks. These proteins are what allow it to infect and enter cells (in this case human airway cells), replicate and make new virus particles. And of course combat the immune system at every step of the way. The genome of this new virus has yet to be published so we cant comment on how it's genes look and function. Where did it come from? We don't know where this virus came from nor why only now are we seeing it. There is also a chance that this virus could have always been in humans but that only due to sensitive lab tests like PCR and deep sequencing we were able to detect it. Although if it does turn out to only cause severe respiratory disease this is probably not the case. Of course the other theory is that this represents the first few infections of this virus into humans, probably emerging from an animal reservoir in the middle east. Sequencing of the virus and comparison of it's genome with other known animal coronaviruses (avian or bat?) may be able to pin point where, when and how it came to infect these two men. How dangerous is it? So far we know of only two cases of this virus infecting humans. N =2 is not much of a sample size to draw any meaningful conclusions. In both men, it is thought this virus caused serious episodes of respiratory disease but without understanding how many other people got infected and who presented with sub-clinical or only mild disease we can't comment on how dangerous it really is. The HPA are aware of a number of other cases of respiratory disease in the middle east but yet these aren;t confirmed to have have anything to do with this new virus. But so far, preliminary follow up studies on the contacts of these two men have yet to pick up any cases of significant disease despite these two men being well passed the viruses incubation period and peak of infectiousness. The ability to detect whether people have been infected in the past via antibody testing will surely clear this mystery up. What can we do about it? Not much. There's no vaccine or no cure but remember that despite this virus kicking around for at least months/weeks, only two cases have been discovered. But anybody returning from the Middle East should be aware of any respiratory symptoms as should anyone associating with people returning from these countries. The countries in question should also be keeping a close eye on clusters of disease and the origins of the virus. Currently the virus doesn't appear to be very infectious or it is highly infectious but causes little or no detectable symptoms. Both theories would fit in with the fact that we have seen no disease in the two men's contacts. So is it like SARS or is it more like 229E? Or something entirely different? As is often the case, only time and science will tell so lets focus on the facts and concentrate on doing important epidemiological, genetic and virology work done. 1 comment: For another take on this virus see Vincent Racaniello's post over at Virology Blog http://www.virology.ws/2012/09/25/a-new-\\... Subscribe To About Connor Connor Bamford is a PhD student at a university in Northern Ireland, UK. He is studying the molecular biology behind how viruses infect and cause disease in humans. DISCLAIMER: the views expressed in this blog are my own and are not to be confused with those of my institution where I study, my supervisor's, my group's, my nationality, my ethnicity, my gender nor my starsign.


Does Google Make Us Stupid? Respondents to the fourth "Future of the Internet" survey, conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project and Elon University's Imagining the Internet Center, were asked to consider the future of the internet-connected world between now and 2020 and the likely innovation that will occur. The survey required them to assess 10 different "tension pairs" - each pair offering two different 2020 scenarios with the same overall theme and opposite outcomes - and to select the one most likely choice of two statements. Although a wide range of opinion from experts, organizations, and interested institutions was sought, this survey, fielded from Dec. 2, 2009 to Jan. 11, 2010, should not be taken as a representative canvassing of internet experts. By design, the survey was an "opt in," self-selecting effort. Among the issues addressed in the survey was the provocative question raised by eminent tech scholar Nicholas Carr in a cover story for the Atlantic Monthly magazine in the summer of 2008 1 : "Is Google Making us Stupid?" Carr argued that the ease of online searching and distractions of browsing through the web were possibly limiting his capacity to concentrate. "I'm not thinking the way I used to," he wrote, in part because he is becoming a skimming, browsing reader, rather than a deep and engaged reader. "The kind of deep reading that a sequence of printed pages promotes is valuable not just for the knowledge we acquire from the author's words but for the intellectual vibrations those words set off within our own minds. In the quiet spaces opened up by the sustained, undistracted reading of a book, or by any other act of contemplation, for that matter, we make our own associations, draw our own inferences and analogies, foster our own ideas.... If we lose those quiet spaces, or fill them up with 'content,' we will sacrifice something important not only in our selves but in our culture." Jamais Cascio, an affiliate at the Institute for the Future and senior fellow at the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, challenged Carr in a subsequent article in the Atlantic Monthly . Cascio made the case that the array of problems facing humanity - the end of the fossil-fuel era, the fragility of the global food web, growing population density, and the spread of pandemics, among others - will force us to get smarter if we are to survive. "Most people don't realize that this process is already under way," he wrote. "In fact, it's happening all around us, across the full spectrum of how we understand intelligence. It's visible in the hive mind of the Internet, in the powerful tools for simulation and visualization that are jump-starting new scientific disciplines, and in the development of drugs that some people (myself included) have discovered let them study harder, focus better, and stay awake longer with full clarity." He argued that while the proliferation of technology and media can challenge humans' capacity to concentrate there were signs that we are developing "fluid intelligence-the ability to find meaning in confusion and solve new problems, independent of acquired knowledge." He also expressed hope that techies will develop tools to help people find and assess information smartly. With that as backdrop, respondents were asked to indicate which of two statements best reflected their view on Google's effect on intelligence. The chart shows the distribution of responses to the paired statements. The first column covers the answers of 371 longtime experts who have regularly participated in these surveys. The second column covers the answers of all the respondents, including the 524 who were recruited by other experts or by their association with the Pew Internet Project. As shown, 76% of the experts agreed with the statement, "By 2020, people's use of the internet has enhanced human intelligence; as people are allowed unprecedented access to more information they become smarter and make better choices. Nicholas Carr was wrong: Google does not make us stupid." Respondents were also asked to "share your view of the internet's influence on the future of human intelligence in 2020 -- what is likely to stay the same and what will be different in the way human intellect evolves?" What follows is a selection of the hundreds of written elaborations and some of the recurring themes in those answers: Nicholas Carr and Google staffers have their say:  "I feel compelled to agree with myself. But I would add that the Net's effect on our intellectual lives will not be measured simply by average IQ scores. What the Net does is shift the emphasis of our intelligence, away from what might be called a meditative or contemplative intelligence and more toward what might be called a utilitarian intelligence. The price of zipping among lots of bits of information is a loss of depth in our thinking."-- Nicholas Carr   "My conclusion is that when the only information on a topic is a handful of essays or books, the best strategy is to read these works with total concentration. But when you have access to thousands of articles, blogs, videos, and people with expertise on the topic, a good strategy is to skim first to get an overview. Skimming and concentrating can and should coexist. I would also like to say that Carr has it mostly backwards when he says that Google is built on the principles of Taylorism [the institution of time-management and worker-activity standards in industrial settings]. Taylorism shifts responsibility from worker to management, institutes a standard method for each job, and selects workers with skills unique for a specific job. Google does the opposite, shifting responsibility from management to the worker, encouraging creativity in each job, and encouraging workers to shift among many different roles in their career....Carr is of course right that Google thrives on understanding data. But making sense of data (both for Google internally and for its users) is not like building the same artifact over and over on an assembly line; rather it requires creativity, a mix of broad and deep knowledge, and a host of connections to other people. That is what Google is trying to facilitate." -- Peter Norvig, Google Research Director   "Google will make us more informed. The smartest person in the world could well be behind a plow in China or India. Providing universal access to information will allow such people to realize their full potential, providing benefits to the entire world." - Hal Varian, Google, chief economist The resources of the internet and search engines will shift cognitive capacities. We won't have to remember as much, but we'll have to think harder and have better critical thinking and analytical skills. Less time devoted to memorization gives people more time to master those new skills.   "Google allows us to be more creative in approaching problems and more integrative in our thinking. We spend less time trying to recall and more time generating solutions." -- Paul Jones, ibiblio, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill  "Google will make us stupid and intelligent at the same time. In the future, we will live in a transparent 3D mobile media cloud that surrounds us everywhere. In this cloud, we will use intelligent machines, to whom we delegate both simple and complex tasks. Therefore, we will lose the skills we needed in the old days (e.g., reading paper maps while driving a car). But we will gain the skill to make better choices (e.g., knowing to choose the mortgage that is best for you instead of best for the bank). All in all, I think the gains outweigh the losses." -- Marcel Bullinga, Dutch Futurist at futurecheck.com   "I think that certain tasks will be 'offloaded' to Google or other Internet services rather than performed in the mind, especially remembering minor details. But really, that is a role that paper has taken over many centuries: did Gutenberg make us stupid? On the other hand, the Internet is likely to be front-and-centre in any developments related to improvements in neuroscience and human cognition research." -- Dean Bubley, wireless industry consultant  "What the internet (here subsumed tongue-in-cheek under "Google") does is to support SOME parts of human intelligence, such as analysis, by REPLACING other parts such as memory. Thus, people will be more intelligent about, say, the logistics of moving around a geography because "Google" will remember the facts and relationships of various locations on their behalf. People will be better able to compare the revolutions of 1848 and 1789 because "Google" will remind them of all the details as needed. This is the continuation ad infinitum of the process launched by abacuses and calculators: we have become more "stupid" by losing our arithmetic skills but more intelligent at evaluating numbers." -- Andreas Kluth, writer, Economist magazine  "It's a mistake to treat intelligence as an undifferentiated whole. No doubt we will become worse at doing some things ('more stupid') requiring rote memory of information that is now available though Google. But with this capacity freed, we may (and probably will) be capable of more advanced integration and evaluation of information ('more intelligent')." -- Stephen Downes, National Research Council, Canada  "The new learning system, more informal perhaps than formal, will eventually win since we must use technology to cause everyone to learn more, more economically and faster if everyone is to be economically productive and prosperous. Maintaining the status quo will only continue the existing win/lose society that we have with those who can learn in present school structure doing ok, while more and more students drop out, learn less, and fail to find a productive niche in the future." -- Ed Lyell, former member of the Colorado State Board of Education and Telecommunication Advisory Commission  "The question is flawed: Google will make intelligence different. As Carr himself suggests, Plato argued that reading and writing would make us stupid, and from the perspective of a preliterate, he was correct. Holding in your head information that is easily discoverable on Google will no longer be a mark of intelligence, but a side-show act. Being able to quickly and effectively discover information and solve problems, rather than do it "in your head," will be the metric we use." -- Alex Halavais, vice president, Association of Internet Researchers   "What Google does do is simply to enable us to shift certain tasks to the network -- we no longer need to rote-learn certain seldomly-used facts (the periodic table, the post code of Ballarat) if they're only a search away, for example. That's problematic, of course -- we put an awful amount of trust in places such as Wikipedia where such information is stored, and in search engines like Google through which we retrieve it -- but it doesn't make us stupid, any more than having access to a library (or in fact, access to writing) makes us stupid. That said, I don't know that the reverse is true, either: Google and the Net also don't automatically make us smarter. By 2020, we will have even more access to even more information, using even more sophisticated search and retrieval tools -- but how smartly we can make use of this potential depends on whether our media literacies and capacities have caught up, too." -- Axel Bruns, Associate Professor, Queensland University of Technology  "My ability to do mental arithmetic is worse than my grandfather's because I grew up in an era with pervasive personal calculators.... I am not stupid compared to my grandfather, but I believe the development of my brain has been changed by the availability of technology. The same will happen (or is happening) as a result of the Googleization of knowledge. People are becoming used to bite sized chunks of information that are compiled and sorted by an algorithm. This must be having an impact on our brains, but it is too simplistic to say that we are becoming stupid as a result of Google." -- Robert Acklund, Australian National University  "We become adept at using useful tools, and hence perfect new skills. Other skills may diminish. I agree with Carr that we may on the average become less patient, less willing to read through a long, linear text, but we may also become more adept at dealing with multiple factors.... Note that I said 'less patient,' which is not the same as 'lower IQ.' I suspect that emotional and personality changes will probably more marked than 'intelligence' changes." -- Larry Press, California State University, Dominguz Hills Technology isn't the problem here. It is people's inherent character traits. The internet and search engines just enable people to be more of what they already are. If they are motivated to learn and shrewd, they will use new tools to explore in exciting new ways. If they are lazy or incapable of concentrating, they will find new ways to be distracted and goof off.  "The question is all about people's choices. If we value introspection as a road to insight, if we believe that long experience with issues contributes to good judgment on those issues, if we (in short) want knowledge that search engines don't give us, we'll maintain our depth of thinking and Google will only enhance it. There is a trend, of course, toward instant analysis and knee-jerk responses to events that degrades a lot of writing and discussion. We can't blame search engines for that.... What search engines do is provide more information, which we can use either to become dilettantes (Carr's worry) or to bolster our knowledge around the edges and do fact-checking while we rely mostly on information we've gained in more robust ways for our core analyses. Google frees the time we used to spend pulling together the last 10% of facts we need to complete our research. I read Carr's article when The Atlantic first published it, but I used a web search to pull it back up and review it before writing this response. Google is my friend." -- Andy Oram, editor and blogger, O'Reilly Media   "Google isn't making us stupid -- but it is making many of us intellectually lazy. This has already become a big problem in university classrooms. For my undergrad majors in Communication Studies, Google may take over the hard work involved in finding good source material for written assignments. Unless pushed in the right direction, students will opt for the top 10 or 15 hits as their research strategy. And it's the students most in need of research training who are the least likely to avail themselves of more sophisticated tools like Google Scholar. Like other major technologies, Google's search functionality won't push the human intellect in one predetermined direction. It will reinforce certain dispositions in the end-user: stronger intellects will use Google as a creative tool, while others will let Google do the thinking for them." -- David Ellis, York University, Toronto   "For people who are readers and who are willing to explore new sources and new arguments, we can only be made better by the kinds of searches we will be able to do. Of course, the kind of Googled future that I am concerned about is the one in which my every desire is anticipated, and my every fear avoided by my guardian Google. Even then, I might not be stupid, just not terribly interesting." -- Oscar Gandy, emeritus professor, University of Pennsylvania  "I don't think having access to information can ever make anyone stupider. I don't think an adult's IQ can be influenced much either way by reading anything and I would guess that smart people will use the Internet for smart things and stupid people will use it for stupid things in the same way that smart people read literature and stupid people read crap fiction. On the whole, having easy access to more information will make society as a group smarter though." -- Sandra Kelly, market researcher, 3M Corporation   "The story of humankind is that of work substitution and human enhancement. The Neolithic revolution brought the substitution of some human physical work by animal work. The Industrial revolution brought more substitution of human physical work by machine work. The Digital revolution is implying a significant substitution of human brain work by computers and ICTs in general. Whenever a substitution has taken place, men have been able to focus on more qualitative tasks, entering a virtuous cycle: the more qualitative the tasks, the more his intelligence develops; and the more intelligent he gets, more qualitative tasks he can perform.... As obesity might be the side-effect of physical work substitution by machines, mental laziness can become the watermark of mental work substitution by computers, thus having a negative effect instead of a positive one." -- Ismael Pea-Lopez, lecturer at the Open University of Catalonia, School of Law and Political Science  "Well, of course, it depends on what one means by 'stupid' -- I imagine that Google, and its as yet unimaginable new features and capabilities will both improve and decrease some of our human capabilities. Certainly it's much easier to find out stuff, including historical, accurate, and true stuff, as well as entertaining, ironic, and creative stuff. It's also making some folks lazier, less concerned about investing in the time and energy to arrive at conclusions, etc." -- Ron Rice, University of California, Santa Barbara   "Nick [Carr] says, 'Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski.' Besides finding that a little hard to believe (I know Nick to be a deep diver, still), there is nothing about Google, or the Net, to keep anyone from diving -- and to depths that were not reachable before the Net came along."-- Doc Searls, co-author of "The Cluetrain Manifesto" It's not Google's fault if users create stupid queries.   "To be more precise, unthinking use of the Internet, and in particular untutored use of Google, has the ability to make us stupid, but that is not a foregone conclusion. More and more of us experience attention deficit, like Bruce Friedman in the Nicholas Carr article, but that alone does not stop us making good choices provided that the 'factoids' of information are sound that we use to make out decisions. The potential for stupidity comes where we rely on Google (or Yahoo, or Bing, or any engine) to provide relevant information in response to poorly constructed queries, frequently one-word queries, and then base decisions or conclusions on those returned items." -- Peter Griffiths, former Head of Information at the Home Office within the Office of the Chief Information Officer, United Kingdom  "The problem isn't Google; it's what Google helps us find. For some, Google will let them find useless content that does not challenge their minds. But for others, Google will lead them to expect answers to questions, to explore the world, to see and think for themselves." -- Esther Dyson, longtime internet expert and investor   "People are already using Google as an adjunct to their own memory. For example, I have a hunch about something, need facts to support, and Google comes through for me. Sometimes, I see I'm wrong, and I appreciate finding that out before I open my mouth." -- Craig Newmark, founder Craig's List  "Google is a data access tool. Not all of that data is useful or correct. I suspect the amount of misleading data is increasing faster than the amount of correct data. There should also be a distinction made between data and information. Data is meaningless in the absence of an organizing context. That means that different people looking at the same data are likely to come to different conclusions. There is a big difference with what a world class artist can do with a paint brush as opposed to a monkey. In other words, the value of Google will depend on what the user brings to the game. The value of data is highly dependent on the quality of the question being asked." -- Robert Lunn, consultant, FocalPoint Analytics The big struggle is over what kind of information Google and other search engines kick back to users. In the age of social media where users can be their own content creators it might get harder and harder to separate high-quality material from junk.  "Access to more information isn't enough -- the information needs to be correct, timely, and presented in a manner that enables the reader to learn from it. The current network is full of inaccurate, misleading, and biased information that often crowds out the valid information. People have not learned that 'popular' or 'available' information is not necessarily valid."-- Gene Spafford, Purdue University CERIAS, Association for Computing Machinery U.S. Public Policy Council   "If we take 'Google' to mean the complex social, economic and cultural phenomenon that is a massively interactive search and retrieval information system used by people and yet also using them to generate its data, I think Google will, at the very least, not make us smarter and probably will make us more stupid in the sense of being reliant on crude, generalised approximations of truth and information finding. Where the questions are easy, Google will therefore help; where the questions are complex, we will flounder." -- Matt Allen, former president of the Association of Internet Researchers and associate professor of internet studies at Curtin University in Australia   "The challenge is in separating that wheat from the chaff, as it always has been with any other source of mass information, which has been the case all the way back to ancient institutions like libraries. Those users (of Google, cable TV, or libraries) who can do so efficiently will beat the odds, becoming 'smarter' and making better choices. However, the unfortunately majority will continue to remain, as Carr says, stupid." -- Christopher Saunders, managing editor, internetnews.com  "The problem with Google that is lurking just under the clean design home page is the "tragedy of the commons": the link quality seems to go down every year. The link quality may actually not be going down but the signal to noise is getting worse as commercial schemes lead to more and more junk links." -- Glen Edens, former senior vice president and director at Sun Microsystems Laboratories, chief scientist Hewlett Packard Literary intelligence is very much under threat.   "If one defines -- or partially defines -- IQ as literary intelligence, the ability to sit with a piece of textual material and analyze it for complex meaning and retain derived knowledge, then we are indeed in trouble. Literary culture is in trouble.... We are spending less time reading books, but the amount of pure information that we produce as a civilization continues to expand exponentially. That these trends are linked, that the rise of the latter is causing the decline of the former, is not impossible.... One could draw reassurance from today's vibrant Web culture if the general surfing public, which is becoming more at home in this new medium, displayed a growing propensity for literate, critical thought. But take a careful look at the many blogs, post comments, Facebook pages, and online conversations that characterize today's Web 2.0 environment.... This type of content generation, this method of 'writing,' is not only sub-literate, it may actually undermine the literary impulse.... Hours spent texting and e-mailing, according to this view, do not translate into improved writing or reading skills." -- Patrick Tucker, senior editor, The Futurist magazine New literacies will be required to function in this world. In fact, the internet might change the very notion of what it means to be smart. Retrieval of good information will be prized. Maybe a race of "extreme Googlers" will come into being.   "The critical uncertainty here is whether people will learn and be taught the essential literacies necessary for thriving in the current infosphere: attention, participation, collaboration, crap detection, and network awareness are the ones I'm concentrating on. I have no reason to believe that people will be any less credulous, gullible, lazy, or prejudiced in ten years, and am not optimistic about the rate of change in our education systems, but it is clear to me that people are not going to be smarter without learning the ropes." -- Howard Rheingold, author of several prominent books on technology, teacher at Stanford University and University of California-Berkeley   "Google makes us simultaneously smarter and stupider. Got a question? With instant access to practically every piece of information ever known to humankind, we take for granted we're only a quick web search away from the answer. Of course, that doesn't mean we understand it. In the coming years we will have to continue to teach people to think critically so they can better understand the wealth of information available to them." -- J eska Dzwigalski, Linden Lab   "We might imagine that in ten years, our definition of intelligence will look very different. By then, we might agree on 'smart' as something like a 'networked' or 'distributed' intelligence where knowledge is our ability to piece together various and disparate bits of information into coherent and novel forms." -- Christine Greenhow, educational researcher, University of Minnesota and Yale Information and Society Project   "Human intellect will shift from the ability to retain knowledge towards the skills to discover the information i.e. a race of extreme Googlers (or whatever discovery tools come next). The world of information technology will be dominated by the algorithm designers and their librarian cohorts. Of course, the information they're searching has to be right in the first place. And who decides that?" -- Sam Michel, founder Chinwag, community for digital media practitioners in the United Kingdom One new "literacy" that might help is the capacity to build and use social networks to help people solve problems.  "There's no doubt that the internet is an extension of human intelligence, both individual and collective. But the extent to which it's able to augment intelligence depends on how much people are able to make it conform to their needs. Being able to look up who starred in the 2nd season of the Tracey Ullman show on Wikipedia is the lowest form of intelligence augmentation; being able to build social networks and interactive software that helps you answer specific questions or enrich your intellectual life is much more powerful. This will matter even more as the internet becomes more pervasive. Already my iPhone functions as the external, silicon lobe of my brain. For it to help me become even smarter, it will need to be even more effective and flexible than it already is. What worries me is that device manufacturers and internet developers are more concerned with lock-in than they are with making people smarter. That means it will be a constant struggle for individuals to reclaim their intelligence from the networks they increasingly depend upon." -- Dylan Tweney, senior editor, Wired magazine Nothing can be bad that delivers more information to people, more efficiently. It might be that some people lose their way in this world, but overall, societies will be substantially smarter.   "The Internet has facilitated orders of magnitude improvements in access to information. People now answer questions in a few moments that a couple of decades back they would not have bothered to ask, since getting the answer would have been impossibly difficult." -- John Pike, Director, globalsecurity.org  "Google is simply one step, albeit a major one, in the continuing continuum of how technology changes our generation and use of data, information, and knowledge that has been evolving for decades. As the data and information goes digital and new information is created, which is at an ever increasing rate, the resultant ability to evaluate, distill, coordinate, collaborate, problem solve only increases along a similar line. Where it may appear a 'dumbing down' has occurred on one hand, it is offset (I believe in multiples) by how we learn in new ways to learn, generate new knowledge, problem solve, and innovate." -- Mario Morino, Chairman, Venture Philanthropy Partners Google itself and other search technologies will get better over time and that will help solve problems created by too-much-information and too-much-distraction.  "I'm optimistic that Google will get smarter by 2020 or will be replaced by a utility that is far better than Google. That tool will allow queries to trigger chains of high-quality information -- much closer to knowledge than flood. Humans who are able to access these chains in high-speed, immersive ways will have more patters available to them that will aid decision-making. All of this optimism will only work out if the battle for the soul of the Internet is won by the right people -- the people who believe that open, fast, networks are good for all of us." -- Susan Crawford, former member of President Obama's National Economic Council, now on the law faculty at the University of Michigan   "If I am using Google to find an answer, it is very likely the answer I find will be on a message board in which other humans are collaboratively debating answers to questions. I will have to choose between the answer I like the best. Or it will force me to do more research to find more information. Google never breeds passivity or stupidity in me: It catalyzes me to explore further. And along the way I bump into more humans, more ideas and more answers." -- Joshua Fouts, Senior Fellow for Digital Media & Public Policy at the Center for the Study of the Presidency The more we use the internet and search, the more dependent on it we will become.   "As the Internet gets more sophisticated it will enable a greater sense of empowerment among users. We will not be more stupid, but we will probably be more dependent upon it." -- Bernie Hogan, Oxford Internet Institute Even in little ways, including in dinner table chitchat, Google can make people smarter.  "[Family dinner conversations] have changed markedly because we can now look things up at will. That's just one small piece of evidence I see that having Google at hand is great for civilization." -- Jerry Michalski, president, Sociate 'We know more than ever, and this makes us crazy.'  "The answer is really: both. Google has already made us smarter, able to make faster choices from more information. Children, to say nothing of adults, scientists and professionals in virtually every field, can seek and discover knowledge in ways and with scope and scale that was unfathomable before Google. Google has undoubtedly expanded our access to knowledge that can be experienced on a screen, or even processed through algorithms, or mapped. Yet Google has also made us careless too, or stupid when, for instance, Google driving directions don't get us to the right place. It has confused and overwhelmed us with choices, and with sources that are not easily differentiated or verified. Perhaps it's even alienated us from the physical world itself -- from knowledge and intelligence that comes from seeing, touching, hearing, breathing and tasting life. From looking into someone's eyes and having them look back into ours. Perhaps it's made us impatient, or shortened our attention spans, or diminished our ability to understand long thoughts. It's enlightened anxiety. We know more than ever, and this makes us crazy." -- Andrew Nachison, co-founder, We Media A final thought: Maybe Google won't make us more stupid, but it should make us more modest.   "There is and will be lots more to think about, and a lot more are thinking. No, not more stupid. Maybe more humble." -- Sheizaf Rafaeli, Center for the Study of the Information Society, University of Haifa Read more about responses to other "tension pairs" tested in the survey as well as a more complete description of the survey methodology and respondents at pewinternet.org .


Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey Employment Situation of Veterans Summary For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT) Tuesday, March 20, 2012 USDL-12-0493 Technical information: (202) 691-6378 * cpsinfo@bls.gov * www.bls.gov/cps Media contact: (202) 691-5902 * PressOffice@bls.gov EMPLOYMENT SITUATION OF VETERANS -- 2011 The unemployment rate for veterans who served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces at any time since September 2001--a group referred to as Gulf War-era II veterans--was 12.1 percent in 2011, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. The jobless rate for all veterans was 8.3 percent. Twenty-six percent of Gulf War-era II veterans reported having a service-connected disability in August 2011, compared with about 14 percent of all veterans. This information was obtained from the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly sample survey of about 60,000 households that provides information on employment and unemployment in the United States. Data about veterans are collected monthly in the CPS; those monthly data are the source of the 2011 annual averages presented in this release. In August 2011, a supplement to the CPS collected additional information about veterans on topics such as service-connected disability. Information from the supplement is also presented in this release. The supplement was co-sponsored by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and by the U.S. Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service. For more information, see the Technical Note, which provides definitions of terms used in this release. Highlights from the 2011 data: -- The unemployment rate of veterans in 2011 (8.3 percent) was not statistically different from the rate in 2010 (8.7 percent). The rate for Gulf War-era II veterans also was little different from a year earlier. (See table A.) -- Young male veterans (those ages 18 to 24) who served during Gulf War era II had an unemployment rate of 29.1 percent in 2011, higher than that of young male nonveterans (17.6 percent). (See table 2B.) -- Among all veterans, those with a service-connected disability had an unemployment rate of 8.5 percent in August 2011, about the same as the rate for veterans with no disability (7.9 percent). (See table 6.) -- One in three employed veterans with a service-connected disability worked in the public sector in August 2011, compared with about 1 in 5 veterans with no disability. (See table 7.) -- Gulf War-era II veterans who were current or past members of the Reserve or National Guard had an unemployment rate of 9.1 percent in August 2011, little different than the rate for those veterans who had not been members (11.0 percent). (See table 8.) -- Gulf War-era II veterans who served in Iraq, Afghanistan, or both had an unemployment rate of 11.6 percent in August 2011. (See table 9.) The Veteran Population In 2011, 21.6 million men and women in the civilian noninstitutional population ages 18 and over were veterans. (See table 1.) In the survey, veterans are defined as men and women who have previously served on active duty in the U.S. Armed Forces and who were civilians at the time of the survey. Veterans are more likely to be men and older than nonveterans. In part, this reflects the characteristics of veterans who served during World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam era. Veterans who served during these wartime periods account for about one-half (10.4 million) of the total veteran population. A total of 5.3 million veterans served during Gulf War era I (August 1990 to August 2001) or Gulf War era II (September 2001 forward). Another 5.9 million served outside these designated wartime periods. Because age and other demographic differences affect labor force status, the next sections focus on veterans by period of service. Gulf War-era II Veterans In 2011, about 2.4 million of the nation's veterans had served during Gulf War era II. About 17 percent of these veterans were women, compared with 3 percent of veterans from World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam era. About half of all Gulf War-era II veterans were between the ages of 25 and 34. (See tables 1 and 2A.) Among Gulf War-era II veterans, the unemployment rate for men was 12.0 percent in 2011, little different from the rate for women (12.4 percent). (See table 1.) The unemployment rate for male Gulf War-era II veterans age 18 to 24, at 29.1 percent, was higher than that for nonveterans of the same age group (17.6 percent). The rate for male veterans age 25 to 34 also was higher than the rate for their nonveteran counterparts (13.4 and 9.5 percent, respectively). For those age 35 and over, the unemployment rates of male veterans and nonveterans generally were little different. (See table 2B.) Veterans of Gulf War era II and nonveterans had similar occupational profiles in 2011 after accounting for gender. About one-third of the employed men in both groups worked in management and professional occupations, a higher proportion than in any other major occupational group. Among employed women, about 49 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans and 41 percent of nonveterans worked in management and professional occupations. (See table 4.) Gulf War-era II veterans were about twice as likely to work in the public sector in 2011 as were nonveterans--27 percent and 14 percent, respectively. About 14 percent of employed veterans of the era worked for the federal government, compared with about 2 percent of employed nonveterans. (See table 5.) In August 2011, approximately 38 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans reported that they had served in Iraq, Afghanistan, or both. (Some veterans did not report their location of service.) These veterans had an unemployment rate of 11.6 percent, not statistically different from Gulf War-era II veterans who served elsewhere (8.6 percent). (See table 9.) Gulf War-era I Veterans For the 2.9 million veterans who served during Gulf War era I (August 1990 to August 2001), the proportion that were women (16 percent in 2011) was similar to that of Gulf War-era II veterans. About 87 percent of the era's veterans were age 35 and over, compared with 36 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans. (See tables 1 and 2A.) The labor force participation rate of male veterans from Gulf War era I was 85.7 percent in 2011, little different than the rate for male Gulf War-era II veterans (83.5 percent). The unemployment rate for male Gulf War-era I veterans (7.1 percent) was lower than the rate for Gulf War-era II veterans (12.0 percent). This difference in the unemployment rate reflects, at least in part, the older age profile of veterans who served during Gulf War era I. Unemployment rates of Gulf War-era I veterans were not statistically different from those of nonveterans of the same gender and age group. Veterans of World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam Era In August 2011, about 10.4 million veterans responded that they had served during World War II, the Korean War, or the Vietnam era. Nearly all of these veterans were at least 55 years old, and more than half were at least 65 years old. Nearly all (97 percent) of these veterans were men. In 2011, just over one-third of male veterans of these wartime periods were in the labor force, and their unemployment rate was 7.6 percent. Male veterans of these wartime periods had lower labor force participation rates compared with male nonveterans in the same age categories. (See tables 1 and 2B.) Veterans of Other Service Periods In 2011, about 5.9 million veterans had served on active duty during "other service periods," mainly between the Korean War and the Vietnam era, and between the Vietnam era and Gulf War era I. Because these veterans served between the major wartime periods, which span several decades, this group is concentrated in two age ranges. About 43 percent of these veterans were 45 to 54 years old, and another 38 percent were 65 years and over. (See tables 1 and 2A.) Nine in 10 veterans of other service periods were men. Among most age groups, male veterans of service periods between the designated wartime periods had labor force participation rates and unemployment rates that were not statistically different than those of male nonveterans. Veterans with a Service-connected Disability In August 2011, about 3.0 million veterans, or 14 percent of the total, reported having a service-connected disability. (Some veterans did not report whether they had a service-connected disability.) Veterans with a service-connected disability are assigned a disability rating by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs or the U.S. Department of Defense. Ratings range from 0 to 100 percent, in increments of 10 percentage points, depending on the severity of the condition. (See table 6.) Among veterans with a service-connected disability, about 4 in 10 reported a disability rating of less than 30 percent, while about 3 in 10 had a rating of 60 percent or higher. In August 2011, 60.3 percent of veterans with a service-connected disability rating of less than 30 percent were in the labor force, compared with 26.6 percent for those with a rating of 60 percent or higher. Among veterans who served in Gulf War-era II, about 1 in 4 (633,000) reported having a service-connected disability. Of these, 80.0 percent were in the labor force in August 2011, compared with 83.7 percent of veterans from this period with no service-connected disability. Among Gulf War-era II veterans, the unemployment rate of those with a disability was 12.1 percent, not statistically different from those with no disability (9.5 percent). In August 2011, 19.5 percent (586,000) of veterans who served during Gulf War era I reported a service-connected disability. Their labor force participation rate (69.6 percent) was lower than the rate for veterans from the era who did not have a disability (88.2 percent). Unemployment rates for Gulf War-era I veterans with and without service-connected disabilities were little different (7.1 and 6.9 percent, respectively). Among the 1.2 million veterans with a service-connected disability from World War II, the Korean War, and the Vietnam era, 20.9 percent were in the labor force in August 2011, compared with 35.5 percent of veterans from these periods who did not have a service-connected disability. The unemployment rate of veterans with a disability from these wartime periods was 3.1 percent, below the rate for their counterparts with no disability (8.2 percent). Veterans with a service-connected disability from other service periods had a labor force participation rate of 53.1 percent in August 2011, compared with 56.8 percent for veterans with no disability from these periods. Among veterans from other service periods, the unemployment rates of veterans with and without service-connected disabilities were not statistically different--9.4 and 7.5 percent, respectively. Regardless of period of service, many veterans with a service-connected disability worked in the public sector. In August 2011, 34 percent of employed veterans with a disability worked in federal, state, or local government, compared with 19 percent of veterans with no disability and 14 percent of nonveterans. About 18 percent of employed veterans with a disability worked for the federal government, compared with 6 percent of veterans with no disability and 2 percent of nonveterans. (See table 7.) Reserve and National Guard Membership About 30 percent of both Gulf War-era I and Gulf War-era II veterans were reported to be current or past members of the Reserve or National Guard. Among Gulf War-era II veterans, those who were current or past members of the Reserve or National Guard had an unemployment rate of 9.1 percent in August 2011, little different from those who had never been members (11.0 percent). Gulf War-era II veterans who were current or past members of the Reserve or National Guard had a higher labor force participation rate than those who had never been members. For veterans of Gulf War-era I, labor force participation rates as well as unemployment rates were similar for members and nonmembers. (See table 8.)


If the shoe fits, wear it Meaning If a description applies to you, then accept it. This expression is often used when something derogatory is said about a person who then complains to a third party. The third party, if they agree with the original negative comment, might suggest "If the shoe fits, then wear it". An example of that might be: Origin 'If the shoe fits, wear it' is often shortened to 'If the shoe fits...', leaving the listener to fill in the blank. The expression is the American version of the earlier British phrase 'If the cap fits, wear it', which is also still in general use. Daniel Defoe used the earlier phrase in the satirical poem The Dyet of Poland . Defoe had the work printed in London in 1705 but, as it was a rather vehement critique of the English parliament, Defoe used the flimsy pretence that it had been printed in Dantzig and was the work of 'Angliopoloski of Lithuania'. Defoe's point in the poem was that readers are responsible for their own opinions; he (or rather Angliopoloski) may have written the poem but that any conclusions drawn from it were owned by the reader, not him: Gentlemen, and if the Cap fits any Body let 'em wear it. 'If the cap fits' is itself a version of a yet earlier phrase 'if the cloak sitteth fit', that is, 'if the cloak fits well'. This expression dates from the 16th century and was used in print by Richard Hooker in Of the Lawes of Ecclesiasticall Politie, 1593: Which cloake sitteth no lesse fit on the backe of their cause, then of the Anabaptists. The 'cloak' version of the phrase does suggest that the later 'cap' was a variant of 'cape'. As to 'if the shoe fits', that began being used in the late 18th century. The earliest example that I have found in print is from the US newspaper the New York Gazette & Weekly Mercury , May 1773: Why should Mr. Vanderbeck apply a general comparison to himself? Let those whom the shoe fits wear it. The change from cap to shoe may well have been influenced by the Cinderella story, which has a snug-fitting slipper as the primary plot device. Versions of the tale that include the 'lost slipper' scenario were well known in the USA and Europe by 1773. In 1634, Giambattista Basile, published Il Pentamerone , a popular collection of Italian folk tales. One of the stories, Cenerentola , is the basis of the Cinderella story as we now know it, complete with wicked stepmother, ugly sisters and a missing slipper. Many expressions, for example, ' toe the line ', ' get off your high horse ' etc., were first used literally and their metaphorical meaning came later. 'If the shoe fits' is a rarity in that it has gone the other way - having been used for centuries in a figurative sense, its most common usage now is in shoe shop advertising slogans. Since writing the above piece I've had many reminders from US readers about the shaggy dog story concerning the mythical Foo bird, the droppings of which were supposed to be lucky and shouldn't be washed off. There are as many variants of this old joke as there are tellers of it; the only common element being the punch line "If the Foo shits, wear it".


Chasing A Dream Its funny to think that for as long as I can remember I have always wanted to be a rapper; to make music and connect with people from a wide range of backgrounds. I started rapping at the age of 12 and at first I didn't have anyone's support; people thought I was going through a phase that would be over in a month. I kept at it and as I became better the desire to become a rapper got stronger and stronger, until I finally realized at the age of 15 that I wanted to take it seriously. I didn't tell anyone at the time as I didn't want to be laughed at -- heck, my dad and my brother would laugh at me when I was making music. Though this hurt my feelings and was very discouraging, my mum was always there to support me. I told my mum from early on that it was my dream to become a rapper but at the time we were living in Papua New Guinea. Being a 3rd world country there were not many opportunities so my dream would remain just that for the time being -- a dream. That all changed in early 2010 when I was shipped over to Mount Albert Grammar School boarding house, here in Auckland, New Zealand. I was scared yet excited, as I only knew about nine people in Auckland. I met the twins, Victor and Daley, who were also at the boarding school and had a drive and passion for music, like me. Music was the glue that got me stuck with these two boys; after discovering our common interest in making music and rapping, we would practice for hours on end in the dorm room, making beats, recording, rapping, listening to music, playing instruments and so forth. Eventually through all the practice and making of music, I had my first big break through a track titled " Blue and Yellow " where I was fortunate to meet award winning video director Damien Caine . We quickly became good friends over a short time and I told him I wanted to take rap seriously: I wanted to be a rapper and it was my dream to play in front of crowds and connect with people through music. After months of talking back and forth he said he was starting a new label, Black Platinum Sound , and asked if I wanted to be the first artist on the label. Which brings me here today... I'm about to seal the deal, signing my first label deal with Black Platinum Sound and it feels surreal, like it hasn't hit me yet. It's always been a dream and my first major goal as a rapper to be signed. Being here and having the opportunities that I've been given, I feel truly blessed. It's been a long road and there's still a very long way to go but I move forward, crossing out one goal at a time, forever chasing a dream -- chasing my dream.


While I don't usually talk about politics because my non-profit status prohibits it, it seems to me that the re-election of Obama marks a watershed in the American culture. I can't help but notice the historical precedent. Alexander Tyler wrote about the Athenian Empire nearly 2500 years ago, A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse (generous gifts) from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been two hundred years._? No civilization has ever escaped from or reversed this trend once the tipping point is reached. I believe that we have reached the tipping point. The re-election of Obama is the acknowledgement that the culture of the West will collapse. After this election I realize, the minorities are taking over and only want to milk the government for more handouts. This shit scares me. Even in my town in SoCal a minority mayor has been elected for the first time. I read this and shit my pants. Well, actually I meant to say I was stunned, and feel kinda scared. My Dad is no dummy , he went to Harvard and had a brain like a computer. Only he can't deal with people so well.. After this election I realize, the minorities are taking over and only want to milk the government for more handouts. This shit scares me. Even in my town in SoCal a minority mayor has been elected for the first time. I read this and shit my pants. Well, actually I meant to say I was stunned, and feel kinda scared. My Dad is no dummy , he went to Harvard and had a brain like a computer. Only he can't deal with people so well.. Quoting: hey now 24800996 You and your dad are dumb fucks. Corporate welfare exceeds social welfare. And guess who benefits from social welfare...the globalist bankers who control the planet. And most of them are conservatives. They have the real power so I'm not sure why you're scared of liberals. Sheep only believe in the game of politics. The agenda would've been the same if Romney won. After this election I realize, the minorities are taking over and only want to milk the government for more handouts. This shit scares me. Even in my town in SoCal a minority mayor has been elected for the first time. I read this and shit my pants. Well, actually I meant to say I was stunned, and feel kinda scared. My Dad is no dummy , he went to Harvard and had a brain like a computer. Only he can't deal with people so well.. Quoting: hey now 24800996 Taxpayers have been forced to subsidize them for the last 50 years so the "takeover" was no accident. It's all by design. After this election I realize, the minorities are taking over and only want to milk the government for more handouts. This shit scares me. Even in my town in SoCal a minority mayor has been elected for the first time. I read this and shit my pants. Well, actually I meant to say I was stunned, and feel kinda scared. My Dad is no dummy , he went to Harvard and had a brain like a computer. Only he can't deal with people so well.. Quoting: hey now 24800996 You and your dad are dumb fucks. Corporate welfare exceeds social welfare. And guess who benefits from social welfare...the globalist bankers who control the planet. And most of them are conservatives. They have the real power so I'm not sure why you're scared of liberals. Sheep only believe in the game of politics. The agenda would've been the same if Romney won. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 27296375 I think you are missing the entire point and much like most of sheepish America focusing on the wrong thing, The point is: We are heading for a fiscal cliff !! Yea corporate bailouts , yea Romney is more of the same . SO WHAT ? How does that change the point of article ? The part about history repeating itself really hits home now.


framedyn.dll and srclient.dll can not be found during administrator login to XPe jimt Guest Posts: n/a 's Computer Specifications 4th Aug 2007 Hi, Each time I log into XPe as administrator or as a normal user I get these two errors: rundll32.exe - Unable to locate component. This application has failed to start because framedyn.dll was not found. Re-installing the application may fix this problem. and RUNDLL Error loading srclient.dll The specified module could not be found. I built on XP Pro with SP2+FP2007 w/Rollup 1.0 on the purchased XPe studio using the xpetools "XP Pro emulation" filter. I have verified that the "WMI Core" component (which brings in framedyn.dll) and "System Restore Core" component (which brings in srclient.dll) are present in TD and the build log. I can also see both DLLs on the XPe runtime image that is running. No msg related to framedyn.dll was found in FBALOG.TXT. No mention of either of these DLLs in the SetupApi.log file. Nothing found in the system event log. Any clues? I'm stumped... Thanks, -- jimt jimt Guest Posts: n/a 's Computer Specifications 8th Aug 2007 I "fixed" this problem by changing Wbem in the PATH to wbem (see http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=31911\\... to see why I tried this) and rebooted. After the change, the problem went away. BUT, if I change the path back to using a capital W for Wbem again and reboot, the probem does not return. Huh?? Maybe there is some sort of a registry caching or ??? going on. Very very flakey. I'm going ahead with my manual fbreseal and hope the problem does not come back. -- jimt "jimt" <jim_underscore_thalmann_@_avid_dot_c\\... wrote in message news:%(E-Mail Removed)... > Hi, > > Each time I log into XPe as administrator or as a normal user I get these > two errors: > > rundll32.exe - Unable to locate component. > This application has failed to start because framedyn.dll was not found. > Re-installing the application may fix this problem. > > and > > RUNDLL > Error loading srclient.dll > The specified module could not be found. > > I built on XP Pro with SP2+FP2007 w/Rollup 1.0 on the purchased XPe studio > using the xpetools "XP Pro emulation" filter. I have verified that the > "WMI Core" component (which brings in framedyn.dll) and "System Restore > Core" component (which brings in srclient.dll) are present in TD and the > build log. I can also see both DLLs on the XPe runtime image that is > running. > > FBALOG.TXT reported this: > [FBACallEntryPoint] LoadLibrary (C:\WINDOWS\system32\srclient.dll) > (Error: 0x7e) > > No msg related to framedyn.dll was found in FBALOG.TXT. No mention of > either of these DLLs in the SetupApi.log file. Nothing found in the > system event log. > > Any clues? I'm stumped... Thanks, > > -- > jimt >