Author: Joseph Miller

  • Perdue’s Budget Cuts Teacher Jobs

    Governor Bev Perdue’s proposed budget will eliminate teacher jobs by forcing cuts at the County level, avoiding having her name associated with these job losses.

    Governor Bev Perdues proposed budget takes serious fiscal action to correct North Carolina’s projected deficit, which is what is needed to correct our state’s more than $2 billion budget shortfall.Governor Perdue has promised not to teacher jobs or teacher assistants in her plan. However, she has moved some education costs such as buying school buses and workers compensation to the Counties so the state won’t have to pay this any more. This will almost certainly result in lost teachers’ jobs but Perdue would be able to blame the Counties and claim immunity.

    The education portion of the budget is about 21% so it seems almost certain that education budgets must be cut to balance it. However, today in the news are protests in Wisconsin over teacher jobs that are scaring politicians across the country. Ultimately, Governor Perdue just doesn’t have the courage to put her name on the teacher job cuts she knows are coming.

    The budget proposed by Governor Perdue is ultimately a bill that will cut teacher jobs, but Perdue can blame the Counties and attempt to save her political image. This plan is likely to raise a stink in each of our 100 Counties and leave Governor Perdue smelling like a rose.

  • Innovation to WTF (Win The Future)

    This is how Obama plans to Win The Future with Green Innovation as explained in his State of the Union address.

  • Start your own Tea Party!

    Don Davis – 2 minutes review by the Greene Tea Party of his run for the NC state Senate.

    Ashley Woolard – 2 minutes of a Greene County Tea Party review of Ashley Woolard’s campaign platform.

    Van Braxton – a Greene County Tea Party review of Van Braxton in 2 minutes on YouTube.

    Greene Tea Party is a group of concerned citizens in Greene County and surrounding areas committed to Constitutionally-limited government, fiscal responsibility, and free markets. This group was organized by ordinary citizens who just wanted to get involved and take action. You can start your own, go to starting your own Tea Party.

  • Pro-Choice is America

    In 1776, Thomas Jefferson and our other forefathers produced the Declaration of Independence, the foundation of our country, our freedom, and our Choice. As a free nation, we declared certain truths to be self-evident and of the natural order, that we have the inalienable Choice of our life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

    This Choice is what defines American freedom. The Choice of the People is above the choice of any government. The American Government was created to “provide new Guards for [our Choices’] future security.” The existence of a government is to solely provide this security, the Choice of the individual People.

    It is our Bill of Rights which spells out in detail this right to Choice. The rights of the People guaranteed, apart from the responsibilities given the Government in the rest of the Constitution. This Bill of Rights guarantees us the choice to our faith, the choice to our speech, the choice to press and publication. The People are given the right of choice to bear arms, so that we may provide our own protection to our Life and our Liberty. This freedom of Choice is to be free from hindrance of our Government, so we are guaranteed due process and protection against unreasonable searches and self-incrimination. And the rights not specifically given to our national Government are reserved for our States and our People.

    These freedoms are Choices. We have the freedom to speak, but we are not required to do so. We have the freedom to arm ourselves, but we are not required to carry a gun. Our Government provides protection for these choices through our many laws. The idea is that these Choices will be protected, except where they may infringe upon the Choices of other People. The freedom to choose is of the Natural Law. It is self-evident regardless of political persuasion or religious ideals.

    It is these Choices that we the People wish to protect. It is when these choices are disregarded or diminished that we, the People, become most angry.

    It is widely accepted that the American health care system needs quite a bit of work. But the causes, extent of the problems, and how to address these problems make for extremely polarizing debate. Most Americans welcome the benefits of the reform that is currently being debated. Provide a way to insure those with pre-existing conditions. Prevent insurance companies from dropping coverage at will. Limit health expenses and reduce costs. Provide easier, more affordable ways to get health insurance. Change the medical environment that encourages cost explosion. Who wouldn’t want these things? Why are half of Americans against these changes for their own benefit?

    In our current system, we do not have a lot of choice over our own health care. It is the insurance companies’ choice if we get coverage and how much we get. It is the health providers’ choice how much it will cost. It is our government’s choice how the insurance companies and the health providers operate and in which States. These are the things which we reject. These are the things that must change. Choice must be returned to the People.

    With the plan presented by the Congress, this choice has been reduced, ignored, even trampled upon. Politicians are having a hard time giving benefits away, and many do not understand why. We the People demand the Choice, it is our right and our freedom. For anyone else, including (or especially) the Government to take the choice away from the health care system, only to give it to themselves instead of the People, is a violation of our Declaration of Independence and our Bill of Rights. When the Government is ready to return the Choice to the People, they will have my full support, and the support of many others.

    Note: For those who thought that this would be an article about abortion, I want to address the confusion about abortion and choice. Let me be clear. Abortion is the complete negative, the opposite of choice. For 92% of women who have abortions, it was their choices which led to their pregnancy. The science that a baby not yet born is in fact a living, unique person, with their own DNA, is indisputable. For the other 8% of women who were victims of rape, incest, or health conditions, it was not their choice to be in their position. That choice was removed from them and it is a grievous evil. It was also not their child’s choice to be created, that opportunity is not provided to any of us. But to remove the choice of life from a living child is also a wrong, against the Natural Law, which cannot make up for any other wrong. For this reason it is important that all of us do whatever we can to help those women around us who are in desperate need. These are not problems which can be solved by laws or governments, but by People.

  • Full-body airport scanners show much detail in 3D

    These full-body scanners are not only a violation of the constitution, they show the body in great detail in 3D. Download the full 3D Blender model.

    The images coming out of some of these 3D scanners are apparently what is known as a depth map. Lighter colored areas indicate areas which are closer to the viewer while darker colored areas are further away. This particular model was put together very quickly with a minimal amount of processing. A simple blur effect was applied to the original image, then Blender automatically converted the image to a 3D model. No additional processing was added to the image, but more tweaking and an artist’s touch (I am not an artist) could complete the 3D model to produce something that could be animated.

    Many who support the full body scanners do so on the assumption that they are not showing any detail to the viewer. However, the detail shown by this model demonstrates that it is much, much more than we have been led to believe. It is reasonable to believe that images high-profile persons such as celebrities would probably at some point be taken and end up released in some form on the Internet in the way we have seen with many other types of leaks. Images taken of children very likely would be illegal, but of high monetary value considering the high illegality of such images. Ultimately, there would be enough incentive that someone is likely to violate this – it would only be a matter of time.

  • David Goldhill Health System

    If you live in America, and you don’t read anything else on health care, read David Goldhill’s Health System Plan. Join the Facebook group, Advocates for David Goldhill Health Plan. Place health care control back in the hands of the patients, not insurers or government policy. Read it. Good stuff.

  • Incognito Anonymous Browsing

    The TOR Project allows for some very decent anonymous web browsing. One of the best ways to use this is through the Incognito live CD. Put the CD in the drive, reboot the computer, and walaa! You may have to set the time once the computer boots up to get it to work. Note that while TOR anonymity is pretty good, it is NOT STRONG ANONYMITY! Read Wikipedia on TOR eavesdropping

  • Qemu vs. Qemu+USB Tablet vs. VMPlayer using PCMark05

    Qemu vs. Qemu+USB Tablet vs. VMPlayer using PCMark05

    Background
    I have been running a WinXP 32-bit guest on a Debian x86 host computer for some time. I began by using Qemu+KQEMU in -kernel-kqemu mode. I switched to the free vmplayer because I noticed that it was faster than Qemu. When running Qemu, my host processor seemed to spend a majority of its time in kernel mode. This was as reported by top, which apprently is quite unreliable, but was a hint at a problem with my configuration. Apparently, using the very convenient usb tablet emulation wastes a lot of CPU cycles. So I determined to see how much of a difference there was between Qemu+KQEMU and Qemu+KQEMU with usb tablet emulation. While I was at this, I figured I would run a benchmark on the vmplayer.

    Host System

    CPU Pentium 4 2.66GHz
    RAM 1.5GB

    Qemu+KQEMU without USB Tablet Emulation CVS 20061216
    qemu -hda windowsxp.qcow -m 512 -kernel-kqemu -net nic -net tap,ifname=tap3

    Qemu+KQEMU with USB Tablet Emulation CVS 20061216
    qemu -hda windowsxp.qcow -m 512 -kernel-kqemu -net nic -net tap,ifname=tap3 -usbdevice tablet

    Qemu+KQEMU with USB Tablet Emulation Patch CVS 20061219
    qemu -hda windowsxp.qcow -m 512 -kernel-kqemu -net nic -net tap,ifname=tap3 -usbdevice tablet

    VMPlayer 1.0.2 build-29634
    #!/usr/bin/vmware
    config.version = "8"
    virtualHW.version = "3"
    ide0:0.present = "TRUE"
    ide0:0.filename = "winxp2.vmdk"
    memsize = "512"
    MemAllowAutoScaleDown = "FALSE"
    ide1:0.present = "TRUE"
    ide1:0.fileName = "auto detect"
    ide1:0.deviceType = "cdrom-raw"
    ide1:0.autodetect = "TRUE"
    floppy0.present = "FALSE"
    ethernet0.present = "TRUE"
    usb.present = "FALSE"
    sound.present = "FALSE"
    sound.virtualDev = "es1371"
    displayName = "Windows XP Pro"
    guestOS = "winxppro"
    nvram = "winxp2.nvram"
    MemTrimRate = "-1"
    ide0:0.redo = ""
    ethernet0.addressType = "generated"
    uuid.location = "56 4d 88 59 b6 23 e5 8c-3d 31 6d 36 ad 34 c7 99"
    uuid.bios = "56 4d 88 59 b6 23 e5 8c-3d 31 6d 36 ad 34 c7 99"
    ethernet0.generatedAddress = "00:0c:29:34:c7:99"
    ethernet0.generatedAddressOffset = "0"
    tools.syncTime = "TRUE"
    ide1:0.startConnected = "TRUE"
    uuid.action = "create"
    checkpoint.vmState = ""
    tools.remindInstall = "TRUE"

    Benchmarking
    I used Futuremark’s PCMark05 for no particular reason, and it was particularly cranky with my display adapters and drivers. I have no expertise or experience benchmarking anything and I do not lay claim to be a benchmarking expert. I performed these tests to determine if there was a *noticeable* difference in two particular areas. HDD I/O and memory access speeds. I am assuming that since Qemu+KQEMU and VMPlayer are both virtualization products they should perform similarly well with CPU-intensive tasks. I am not interested in finding small performance differences, I’m looking for something significant.

    Results
    The percentages below are relative to the Qemu+KQEMU without USB tablet emulation. You can see that with the USB tablet emulation, Qemu is slowed to almost half the speed it would be without USB tablet emulation.

    Qemu Qemu USB Tablet Qemu USB Tablet Patch VMPlayer
    HDD – XP Startup 5.78 MB/s 4.94 MB/s 5.78 MB/s 9.25 MB/s
    Web Page Rendering 0.58 Pages/s 0.26 MB/s 0.48 Pages/s 1.37 Pages/s
    File Decryption 41.8 MB/s 24.44 MB/s 40.23 MB/s 47.91 MB/s
    HDD – General Usage 8.02 MB/s 5.08 MB/s 7.17 MB/s 7.39 MB/s
    MT / Audio Compression 726.63 KB/s 375.43 KB/s 690.24 KB/s 1247.69 KB/s
    MT / Video Encoding 90.98 KB/s 47.01 KB/s 86.63 KB/s 115.04 KB/s
    MT / Text Edit 15.1 Pages/s 7.51 Pages/s 14.77 Pages/s 45.92 Pages/s
    MT / Image Decompression 7.3 MPixels/s 4.86 MPixels/s 7.53 MPixels/s 5.49 MPixels/s
    MT / File Compression 1.65 MB/s 0.94 MB/s 1.64 MB/s 1.93 MB/s
    MT / File Encryption 11.18 MB/s 7.01 MB/s 9.89 MB/s 13.42 MB/s
    MT / HDD – Virus Scan 17.14 MB/s 9.53 MB/s 17.61 MB/s 21.4 MB/s
    MT / Memory Latency – Random 16MB 1.03 MAccesses/s 0.31 MAccesses/s 1.07 MAccesses/s 4.31 MAccesses/s
    Qemu USB Tablet % VMPlayer %
    HDD – XP Startup 85.47% 160.03%
    Web Page Rendering 44.83% 236.21%
    File Decryption 58.47% 114.62%
    HDD – General Usage 63.34% 92.14%
    MT / Audio Compression 51.67% 171.71%
    MT / Video Encoding 51.67% 126.45%
    MT / Text Edit 49.74% 304.11%
    MT / Image Decompression 66.58% 75.21%
    MT / File Compression 56.97% 116.97%
    MT / File Encryption 62.70% 120.04%
    MT / HDD – Virus Scan 55.60% 124.85%
    MT / Memory Latency – Random 16MB 30.10% 418.45%
    Average (Completely Meaningless) 56.43% 171.73%

    What Does It Mean?
    Well, Qemu’s USB tablet emulation sucks, unless of course you really need it, then it’s great 😉 It is very interesting that the CPU speed results of Qemu vs. VMPlayer are similar and that the disk I/O speeds are also similar. Why is that interesting? Because the memory access of VMPlayer is about 4 times faster than Qemu. Almost all of the differences in performance between Qemu and VMPlayer in these results could be attributed to the memory performance differences. I consider this good news because disk I/O seems slightly faster in Qemu than VMPlayer. Once the memory access speed issue is worked out in Qemu, Qemu is likely to be faster than VMPlayer. I’m assuming that this is an issue for KQEMU or Qvm86 and that the Qemu developers can do little about it. Fabrice, what can be the culprit?