<?xml version="1.0"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="./entry.xsl"?>
<entry>
<title>Thursday, November 18, 2010</title>
<extlink>
  <mylink>index.html</mylink>
  <linktext>Journal Index file</linktext>
</extlink>
<extlink>
  <mylink>http://brucesalem.blogspot.com</mylink>
  <linktext>My Blog on Google</linktext>
</extlink>
<extlink>
  <mylink>scripts/feedback.html</mylink>
  <linktext>Feedback Form</linktext>
</extlink>
<para id="p1">
<subtitle>A Change</subtitle>
<body>
This morning I went for my morning coffee at Cafe Barrone in Menlo Park
and was outraged to find that they had raised the price from $1.25 to
$1.80 overnight. Later I checked at Starbucks and found the rice to fill
the cup I use for takeout, which I bought from them, was $1.40. So, yes I
had heard that the price of coffee has risen worldwide because a demand from
China, and Cafe Barrone had raised the price from $1.10 to $1.25 earlier
ths year, but a 50 cent increase all at once is a rip off, not only is it
that but the excuse that it was raised to keep the uality high doesn't offset
the fact that the quality of using Cafe Baronne has been declining over the
months due to overcrowding and rude patrons, so I have decided to either go
elsewhere or cut out my coffee habit altogether. I have no ilusions that it
matters to them that I may not come by anymore, I am not a big spender, but
whereever their priorities are, I don't feel part of it. I have a couple of
friends I talk to at Barrone, but no one who is so important to me that I
can't leave. This even raises the question of why stay in Menlo Park much
longer at all. after all people here are pretty conservative and stuck
in a rut. The only reason Cafe Barrone hasn't dropped prices in the past
three years is that Menlo Park is home to plutocrats who haven't felt the
recession. I wonder how may rstaurants in the nation have been able to
keep prices up or even raise them as Borrone has. I think that the fault is
the Marina and Josh who now run it are much greedier than Zu and Christy,
but in any case they do not need my business. 
</body>
</para>
<toplink/>
<para id="p1">
<subtitle>The simplicity of XML with XSLT</subtitle>
<body>
I invented this template early on, in 2007, long before I got interested in
the new web standards or dabbled in dynamic web pages with PhP or Javascript.
When I downloaded tthe template to my web site it wouldn't work in chrome but
would in Firefox. I discovered that the error was that I had a DOCTYPE
declaration for the data definition for the XML. I removed that, making the
XML ad hoc, and the pages got rendered in both browsers. I keep returning to
this idea as the most elogent because the content and the display of it are
truely separate and the XSLT automatically generates a Table of Contents with
internal links in a list for the page, which could grow to substancial length
and yet still be navigable.
</body>
</para>
<toplink/>
<para id="p2">
<subtitle>Problems from Ubuntu Upgrade</subtitle>
<body>
Upgrading Ubuntu may always be a losing proposition because of the legacy of
files, especially libraries it leaves behind. I noticed that an upgrade from
8.10 to 9.04 left about 7 GB additional files for the OS files. Most of this
seemed to be libraries that were either not properly cleaned up or were left
because older versions of apps installed on the older version caused legacy
libraries to be kept. The sweeper tools are not sophistocated enough to both
leave third party apps alone or find orphaned depandancies and remove them.
I tried one and it clobbered Google Chrome, which I had to reinstall. Another
serious problem is that although I wanted the upgrade from Mozilla 3.0 to 3.6
the latter appearently leaks memory so bad it saturates my CPU. I had heard
this mentioned seaveral places on-line and it is a recurring challenge for
that browser. Still I was able to show that CSS3 features like gradients do
work in the upgrade whereas they didn't work in the older version. I do not
test in IE because I don't have it installed in Linux and I don't boot often
enough into Vista to try it out. I have the later version of Mozilla installed
on Vista and I figure that anyone who hasn't enough knowledge to install it on
a Windows system doesn't want to read my pages anyway.
</body>
</para>
<para id="p2">
<body>
The lesson of the attempt to upgrade Ubuntu verifies what several people have
said on the forums, that it is better to do a fresh install every time you
move to the next revision. Ubuntu is in the mid range in rate of upgrades where
the support policy pretty much forces a reinstall about every two years. U. 9.04
will go out of support in three months, and 10.04 LTS is probably the version
to install. The challenge this represents is that I need to make a new partition
for a new install and remove the old install from the partition I have with my
home directory on it and mount that separately on /home. It is not the policy
to build /home as a separate filesystem, but it sounds like that is the optimal
way to do this. Also, since I did install lots of optional packages in need a
partition with somewhat more than 10 GB. I have space on my Vista partiton that
I could use, but I have to steal the space in a nice way so as to not hurt the
NTFS filesystem, and I have to reinstall grub2 during the reinstall to make
sure everythng boots.
</body>
</para>
<toplink/>
<para>
<subtitle>What's Old is New again at Facebook</subtitle>
<body>
Facebook has announced that it wants to be the biggest e-mail provider in the
world with its half billion accounts but it seems that it has yet to get past
the blog and discover threads by topic which appeared on the USENET in 1982,
so e-mail, which dates back to 1974, and the real need for threads are new
again at Facebook. The idea of Facebook, the six degrees of separation, and
the geometric progression of friends of friends in a simple blog environment
quickly becomes impractable. So, there is the group of people I went to High
School who post hundreds of comments a day, most of which does not interest
me, is banal, or promotes some ideology I am not concerned with, and no
mechanism to mark off and skip that things you don't want to see, as you
would with e-mail threads. It is disconcerting and a waste. So the same
historical progression is going to repeat, e-mail, spam, threads, security
enhancements. Even the multimedia angle isn't new.
</body>
</para>
<toplink/>
</entry>
