text:
Bourne Shell Scripting/Files and streams

The Unix world: one file after another
When you think of a computer and everything that goes with it, you usually come up with a mental list of all sorts of different things:

 * The computer itself
 * The monitor
 * The keyboard
 * The mouse
 * Your hard drive with your files and directories on it
 * The network connection leading to the Internet
 * The printer
 * The DVD player
 * et cetera

Here's a surprise for you: Unix doesn't have any of these things. Well, almost. Unix certainly has files. Unix has endless reams of files. And since Unix has files, it also has a concept of "between files" (think of it this way: if your universe consists only of boxes, you automatically know about spaces where there are no boxes as well). But Unix knows nothing else than that. Everything in the whole (Unix) universe is a file.

Everything is a file. Even things that are really weird things to think of as files, are files. Your (data) files are files. Your directories are files. Your hard drive is a file. Your keyboard, monitor and printer are files. Yes, really: your keyboard is a read-only file of infinite size. Your monitor and printer are infinitely sized write-only files. Your network connection is a read/write file.

At this point you're probably asking: Why? Why would the designers of the Unix system have come up with this madness? Why is everything a file? The answer is: because if everything is a file, you can treat everything like a file. Or, put a different way, you can treat everything in the Unix world the same way. And, as we will see shortly, that means you can also combine virtually everything using file operations.

Before we move on, here's an extra level of weirdness for you: everything in Unix is a file. Including the processes that run programs. Effectively this means that running programs are also files. Including the interactive shell session that you've been running to practice scripting in. Yes, really, that text screen with the blinking cursor is also a file. And we can prove it too. You might recall that in the chapter on Running Commands we mentioned you can exit the shell using the Ctrl+d key combination. Because that combination produces the Unix character for... that's right, end-of-file!

Streams: what goes between files
As we mentioned in the previous section, everything in Unix is a file -- except that which sits between files. Between files Unix defines a mechanism that allows data to move, bit by bit, from one file to another: the stream. A stream is literally what it sounds like: a little river of bits pouring from one file into another. Although actually a bridge would probably have been a better name because unlike a stream (which is a constant flow of water) the flow of bits between files need not be constant, or even used at all.

The standard streams
Within the Unix world it is a general convention that each file is connected to at least three streams (that's because that turned out to be the most useful number for those files that are processes, or running programs). There can be more and in fact each file can cause itself to be connected to any number of streams (a program can print and open a network connection, for instance). But there are three basic streams available to all files, even though they may not always be useful or used. These streams are called the "standard" streams:

 * Standard in (stdin):the standard stream for input into a file.
 * Standard out (stdout):the standard stream for output out of a file.
 * Standard error (stderr):the standard stream for error output from a file.

As you can probably tell, these streams are very geared towards those files that are actually processes of the system. In fact many programming languages (like C, C++, Java and Pascal) use exactly these conventions for their standard I/O operations. And since the Unix operating system family includes them in the core of the system definition, these streams are also central to the Bourne Shell.

Getting hold of the standard streams in your scripts
So now we know that there's a general mechanism for basic input and output in Unix; but how do you get hold of these streams in a script? What do you have to do to hook your script up to the standard out, or read from the standard in? Well, the happy answer is: nothing. Your scripts are automatically connected to the standard in, out and error stream of the process that is running them. When you read input, it automatically comes from the standard in. Your output goes straight to the standard out. And program errors go right to the standard error. In fact you've already used these streams: every example so far that has printed anything has done so to the standard output stream of your script.

And what about the shell in interactive mode? Does that use those standard streams as well? Yes, it does. In interactive mode, the standard in stream is connected to the keyboard file. And the standard output and standard error are connected to the monitor file.

Okay... But what good is it?
This discussion on files and streams has been very interesting so far and a nice insight into the depths of Unix. But what good does it do you to know all this? Ah, glad you asked!

The Bourne Shell has some built-in features that allow you to do neat tricks involving files and their streams. You see, files don't just have streams -- you can also cross-connect the streams of two files. At the end of the previous section we said that the standard input of the interactive session is connected to the keyboard file. In fact it is connected to the standard output stream of the keyboard file. And the standard output and error of the interactive session are connected to the standard input of the monitor file. So you can connect the streams of the interactive session to the streams of devices.

But wait. Do you remember the remark above that the point of Unix considering everything to be a file was that everything gets treated like a file? This is why that was important: you can connect a stream from any file to a stream of any other file. You can connect your interactive shell session to the printer or the network rather than to the monitor (or in addition to the monitor) using streams. You can run a program and have its output go directly to the printer by reconnecting the standard output stream of the program. You can connect the standard output stream of one program directly to the standard input stream of another program and make chains of programs. And the Bourne Shell makes it really simple to do all that.

Do you suddenly feel like you've stuck your fingers in the electrical socket? That's the feeling of the raw power of the shell flowing through your body....

Redirecting: using streams in the shell
As explained in the previous section, the shell process is connected by standard streams to (by default) the keyboard and the monitor. But very often you will want to change this linking. Connecting a file to a stream is a very common operation, so would expect it to be called something like "connecting" or "linking". But since the Bourne Shell has default connections and everything you do is always a change in the default connections, connecting a file to a (different) stream using the shell is actually called redirecting.

There are several operators built in to the Bourne Shell that relate to redirecting. The most basic and general one is the pipe operator, which we will examine in some detail further on. The others are related to redirecting to file.

Redirecting to file
As we explained (or rather: hinted at) in the previous section, one of the enormously powerful features of the Bourne Shell on top of a Unix operating system is the ability to chain programs together. Execute a program, have it produce output, then automatically send that output to another program as input. The possible combinations are endless, as is the power of what you can achieve.

One of the most common places where you might want to send a program's output is to a file in the file system. And this time by file we mean a regular, classic data file and not a Unix "everything is a file including your hardware" file. In order to achieve this you can imagine that we can use the chaining mechanism described above: let a program generate output through the standard output stream, then connect that stream (i.e. redirect the output) to the standard input stream of a program that creates a data file in the file system. And this would absolutely work. However, redirecting to a data file is such a common operation that you don't need a separate end-of-chain program for it. Redirecting to file is built straight into the Bourne Shell, through the following operators:

 * process > data file:redirect the output of process to the data file; create the file if necessary, overwrite its existing contents otherwise.
 * process >> data file:redirect the output of process to the data file; create the file if necessary, append to its existing contents otherwise.
 * process < data file:read the contents of the data file and redirect that contents to process as input.

Redirecting output
Let's take a closer look at these operators through some examples. Take the simple Bourne shell script below called 'hello.sh':

A simple shell script that generates some output

This code may be run in any of the ways described in the chapter Running Commands. When we run the script, it simply outputs the string "Hello" to the screen and then returns us to our prompt. But let's say we want to redirect the output to a file instead. We can use the redirect operators to do that easily:

Redirecting the output to a data file

This time, we don't see the string 'Hello' on the screen. Where's it gone? Well, exactly where we wanted it to: into the (new) data file called 'myfile.txt'. Let's examine this file using the 'cat' command:

Examining the results of redirecting some output

Let's run the program again, this time using the '>>' operator instead, and then examine 'myfile.txt' again using the 'cat' command:

Redirecting using the append redirect

You can see that 'myfile.txt' now consists of two lines — the output has been added to the end of the file (or concatenated); this is due to the use of the '>>' operator. If we run the script again, this time with the single greater-than operator, we get:

Redirecting using the overwrite redirect

Just one 'Hello' again, because the '>' will always overwrite the contents of an existing file if there is one.

Redirecting input
Okay, so it's clear we can redirect output to a data file. But what about reading from a data file? That's also pretty common. The Bourne Shell helps us here as well: the entire process of reading a file and pumping its data into a stream is captured by the '<' operator.

By default 'stdin' is fed from your keyboard; run the 'cat' command without any arguments and it will just sit there, waiting for you to type something: cat ???

In fact 'cat' will sit there all day until you type a 'Ctrl+D' (the 'End of File Character' or 'EOF' for short). To redirect our standard input from somewhere else use the '<' (less-than operator):

Redirecting into the standard input

So 'cat' will now read from the text file 'myfile.txt'; the 'EOF' character is also generated at the end of file, so 'cat' will exit as before.

Note that we previously used 'cat' in this format:

Which is functionally identical to

However, these are two fundamentally different mechanisms: one uses an argument to the command, the other is more general and redirects 'stdin' – which is what we're concerned with here. It's more convenient to use 'cat' with a filename as argument, which is why the inventors of 'cat' put this in. However, not all programs and scripts are going to take arguments so this is just an easy example.

Combining file redirects
It's possible to redirect 'stdin' and 'stdout' in one line:

Redirecting input to and output from cat at the same time

The command above will copy the contents of 'myfile.txt' to 'mynewfile.txt' (and will overwrite any previous contents of 'mynewfile.txt'). Once again this is just a convenient example as we normally would have achieved this effect using 'cp myfile.txt mynewfile.txt'.

Redirecting standard error (and other streams)
So far we have looked at redirecting the "normal" standard streams associated with files, i.e. the files that you use if everything goes correctly and as planned. But what about that other stream? The one meant for errors? How do we go about redirecting that? For example, if we wanted to redirect error data into a log file.

As an example, consider the ls command. If you run the command 'ls myfile.txt', it simply lists the filename 'myfile.txt' – if that file exists. If the file 'myfile.txt' does NOT exist, 'ls' will return an error to the 'stderr' stream, which by default in Bourne Shell is also connected to your monitor.

So, lets run 'ls' a couple of times, first on a file which does exist and then on one that doesn't:

Listing an existing file

and then:

Listing a non-existent file

And again, this time with 'stdout' redirected only:

Trying to redirect...

We still see the error message; 'logfile.txt' will be created but will be empty. This is because we have now redirected the stdout stream, while the error message was written to the error stream. So how do we tell the shell that we want to redirect the error stream?

In order to understand the answer, we have to cover a little more theory about Unix files and streams. You see, deep down the reason that we can redirect stdin and stdout with simple operators is that redirecting those streams is so common that the shell lets us use a shorthand notation for those streams. But actually, to be completely correct, we should have told the shell in every case which stream we wanted to redirect. In general you see, the shell cannot know: there could be tons of streams connected to any file. And in order to distinguish one from the other each stream connected to a file has a number associated with it: by convention 0 is the standard in, 1 is the standard out, 2 is standard error and any other streams have numbers counting on from there. To redirect any particular stream you prepend the redirect operator with the stream number (called the file descriptor. So to redirect the error message in our example, we prepend the redirect operator with a 2, for the stderr stream:

Redirecting the stderr stream

No output to the screen, but if we examine 'logfile.txt':

Checking the logfile

As we mentioned before, the operator without a number is a shorthand notation. In other words, this:

is actually short for

We can also redirect both 'stdout' and 'stderr' independently like this:

'stdio.txt' will be blank, 'logfile.txt' will contain the error as before.

If we want to redirect stdout and stderr to the same file, we can use the file descriptor as well:

Here '2>&1' means something like 'redirect stderr to the same file stdout has been redirected to'. Be careful with the ordering! If you do it this way:

you will redirect stderr to the file that stdout points to, then send stdout somewhere else — and both streams will end up being redirected to different locations.

Special files
We said earlier that the redirect operators discussed so far all redirect to data files. While this is technically true, Unix magic still means that there's more to it than just that. You see, the Unix file system tends to contain a number of special files called "devices", by convention collected in the /dev directory. These device files include the files that represent your hard drive, DVD player, USB stick and so on. They also include some special files, like /dev/null (also known as the bit bucket; anything you write to this file is discarded). You can redirect to device files as well as to regular data files. Be careful here; you really don't want to redirect raw text data to the boot sector of your hard drive (and you can!). But if you know what you're doing, you can use the device files by redirecting to them (this is how DVDs are burned in Linux, for instance). As an example of how you might actually use a device file, in the 'Solaris' flavour of Unix the loudspeaker and its microphone can be accessed by the file '/dev/audio'. So:

Will play a sound, whereas:

Will record a sound.(you will need to CTRL-C this to finish...)

This is fun:

Now wave the microphone around whilst shouting - Jimi Hendrix style feedback. Great stuff. You will probably need to be logged in as 'root' to try this by the way.

Some redirect warnings
The astute reader will have noticed one or two things in the discussion above. First of all, a file can have more than just the standard streams associated with it. Is it legal to redirect those? Is it even possible? The answer is, technically, yes. You can redirect stream 4 or 5 of a file (if they exist). Don't try it though. If there's more than a few streams in any direction, you won't know which stream you're redirecting. Plus, if a program needs more than the standard streams it's a good bet that program also needs its extra streams going to a specific location.

Second, you might have noticed that file descriptor 0 is, by convention, the standard input stream. Does that mean you can redirect a program's standard input away from the program? Could you do the following?

The answer is, yes you can. And yes, things will break if you do.

Pipes, Tees and Named Pipes
So, after all this talk about redirecting to file, we finally get to it: general redirecting by cross-connecting streams. The most general form of redirecting and the most powerful one to boot. It's called a pipe and is performed using the pipe operator '|'. Pipes allow you to join two processes together through a "pipeline", which directly connects the stdout of one file to the stdin of another.

As an example let's consider the 'grep' command which returns a matching string, given a keyword and some text to search. And let's also use the ps command, which lists running processes on the machine. If you give the command

it will generally list pagefuls of running processes on your machine, which you would have to sift through manually to find what you want. Let's say you are looking for a process which you know contains the word 'oracle'; use the output of 'ps' to pipe into grep, which will only return the matching lines:

Now you will only get back the lines you need. What happens if there's still loads of these ? No problem, pipe the output to the command 'more' (or 'pg'), which will pause your screen if it fills up:

What about if you want to kill all those processes? You need the 'kill' program, plus the process number for each process (the second column returned by the ps command). Easy:

In this command, 'ps' lists the processes and 'grep' narrows the results down to oracle. The 'awk' tool pulls out the second column of each line. And 'xargs' feeds each line, one at a time, to 'kill' as a command line argument.

Pipes can be used to link as many programs as you wish within reasonable limits (and we don't know what these limits are!)

Don't forget you can still use the redirectors in combination:

There is another useful mechanism that can be used with pipes: the 'tee'. To understand tee, imagine a pipe shaped like a 'T' - one input, two outputs:

The 'tee' will copy whatever is given to its stdin and redirect this to the argument given (a file); it will also then send a further copy to its stdout - which means you can effectively intercept the pipe, take a copy at this stage, and carry on piping up other commands; useful maybe for outputting to a logfile, and copying to the screen.

A note on piped commands: piped processes run in parallel on the Unix environment. Sometimes one process will be blocked, waiting for input from another process. But each process in a pipeline is, in principle, running simultaneously with all the others.

Named pipes
There is a variation on the in-line pipe which we have been discussing called the 'named pipe'. A named pipe is actually a file with its own 'stdin' and 'stdout' - which you attach processes to. This is useful for allowing programs to talk to each other, especially when you don't know exactly when one program will try and talk to the other (waiting for a backup to finish etc.) and when you don't want to write a complicated network-based listener or do a clumsy polling loop.

To create a 'named pipe', you use the 'mkfifo' command (fifo=first in, first out; so data is read out in the same order as it is written into).

This creates a named pipe called 'mypipe'; next we can start using it.

This test is best run with two terminals logged in:

1. From 'terminal a'

The 'cat' will sit there waiting for an input.

2. From 'terminal b'

This should finish immediately. Flick back to 'terminal a'; this will now have read from the pipe and received an 'EOF', and you will see the data on the screen; the command will have finished, and you are back at the command prompt.

Now try the other way round:

1. From terminal 'b'

This will now sit there, as there isn't another process on the other end to 'drain' the pipe - it's blocked.

2. From terminal 'a'

As before, both processes will now finish, the output showing on terminal 'a'.

Here documents
So far we have looked at redirecting from and to data files and cross-connecting data streams. All of these shell mechanisms are based on having a "physical" source for data — a process or a data file. Sometimes though, you want to feed some data into a target without having a source for it. In these cases you can use an "on the fly" document called a here document. A here document means that you open a virtual text document (in memory), type into it as usual, close it and then treat it like any normal file.

Creating a here document is done using a variation on the input redirect operator: the '<<' operator. Like the input redirect operator, the here document operator takes an argument. For the input redirect operator this operand is the name of the file to be streamed in. For the here document operator it is the string that will terminate the here document. So using the here document operator looks like this:

For example:

Using a here document

When using here documents in combination with variable or command substitution, it is important to realize that substitutions are carried out before the here document is passed on. So for example:

Using a here document with substitutions


text: User talk:140.192.34.10

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:140.192.34.10


text:
Rhetoric and Composition/Capitalization

Capitalize means to use uppercase for the first letter of a word.

Basic Principles
They are also lowercased when being used in a plural setting:
 * Proper nouns: Capitalize nouns that are the unique identification for a particular person, place or thing.
 * Example: Michael, Minnesota, North America.
 * Proper names: Capitalize common nouns like party only when they are part of the full name for the person, place or thing.
 * Example: I am a member of the Democratic Party.
 * Example: Are you going to the party?
 * Example: The Democratic and Republican parties.
 * Sentences: Capitalize the first word of every sentence including quoted statements and direct questions.
 * Composition: Capitalize the main words in the names of books, movies, plays, poems, operas, songs, radio and television programs, etc.
 * Example: Family Guy.
 * Titles: Capitalize formal titles only when used in front of a name, not when used after the name.
 * Example: Associate Professor John Doe / John Doe, associate professor.
 * Academic titles: Capitalize and spell out formal titles only when they precede a name.
 * Example: Chancellor David Nachriener.

title: Rhetoric and Composition/Capitalization


text:
Self-Reliance Handbook

This handbook is intended as a reference for everything necessary for a person or group to become self-sustaining in every way possible. It will include information and links to other books which are useful in the obtaining of this goal. In each category information will be organized from less complex and sophisticated methods to ones requiring more sophistication. For example, in the section on construction of shelters the first entry explains how to construct a makeshift temporary structure out of sticks and leaves, while later entries discuss more permanent building methods including ones capable of withstanding hurricane force winds. Because this is such a broad topic, and will doubtless cover information which is available in other books, each section will contain a subsection for linking to other applicable books on the subject being addressed. This will prevent unnecessary work and redundancy.

Housing and shelter
Your primary consideration in housing type for self-reliance will be what type of building materials are available to you. Once you have established that move on to consideration of how long you will choose to stay in that location. Temporary shelters are easy and fast to construct and even with several weeks in a location are easy to maintain. Long term shelters need more forethought and care during construction.

All shelters should be built with at least two doors so that you are not trapped inside the shelter. Depending on your situation even more consideration to getting out of the shelter could be prudent.

 * /Debris Hut Construction/
 * /Snow Shelter Construction/
 * /Rock Construction/
 * /Ferrocement Construction/
 * /Cordwood Masonry/

Sanitation

 * /Purifying Water/
 * /Disposal of Human Waste/
 * /Washing Clothes/
 * /Making Soap/

Food and farming

 * /Gathering Edibles/
 * /Vegetable Growing Guide/

Tools and manufacturing

 * /Simple Oil Lamps/

Other Wikibooks

 * Outdoor Survival
 * First Aid
 * Cookbook
 * Raising Chickens

Wikiversity

 * DIY home electricity system
 * Compressed air kit car
 * Domestic house food production system
 * Low-cost, tropical, private food production system
 * Underground refrigerated storage room
 * Survival wallet
 * Simplified DIY Rooftop Wind Turbine
 * General house construction
 * Resealable barrel for drinks

Wikipedia articles

 * Microgeneration article

title: Self-Reliance Handbook


text:
Self-Reliance Handbook/Debris Hut Construction

A strong ridge pole and a good location are the first steps to the debris hut. Make sure the area is high and dry to avoid any problems with water drainage during a storm. The area was checked for abundance of material and possible hazards. (i.e. poisonous plants, insects, deadfalls, widow-makers, etc.) Direction is noted for the door. Look closely; you may find my tracks in a thin layer of debris under the ridgepole.

Next, sticks are placed as ribbing along both sides of the ridge pole. This is done after I have laid down and measured the interior. Note the door opening near the sapling facing east or slightly southeast.

A good alternative to starting this method that is even easier to make is just to lean sticks against a big long log, fallen tree or rock.

Still more sticks are placed to hold the debris up. More dry debris is also stuffed in the interior for comfortable bedding that lifts you off the cold ground. This is also a good time to roof off your entryway by placing four forked sticks into the ground at the desired height, and ribbing the top with a network of sticks.

Start piling on debris thick and high. Note the steep walls for shedding water.

The finished product! The walls are about 2 feet thick, good for a 20 degree night. This was probably my 10th debris hut. It took about 2 hours from start to finish. The rather speedy time (for me anyway) was no doubt due to the extraordinary abundance of material in this beautiful transition forest.


text: Self-Reliance Handbook/Vegetable Growing Guide


text:
Self-Reliance Handbook/Washing Clothes

Well it's wash day again and you've got piles and piles of laundry that needs to be taken care of right away! But you have no electricity! Now what?

First of all, don't despair! Great Grandmother did it, so can you! She had the tools of the trade though, and you can too with a little ingenuity...

The very first thing to do is gather all your equipment. You will need: 3 large tubs, water tight. These can be made of any material. Years ago iron pots were used for this, but I use galvanized tubs or even plastic for rinsing. Laundry Soap. Of course, lye soap was used many years ago, but if you only have regular laundry soap, so much the better! You can even use bar soap like Ivory. There are liquid laundry soaps designed for use with cold water, which reduce the need for washing in hot water.

A washing board. Yep, you really need this little contraption. Unless that is, you want to take your clothes and pound the dirt out of them with a club! Yes, some ladies actually did this to clean their clothes! Wore the fabric out pretty quickly, I'd say. Believe me, you will get very tired of rubbing your clothes on your hands, get a wash board. You might want to get a bottle of bluing for the whites, and some fabric softener. You'll need a supply of wood for a fire and a safe place to build a fire. One of your pans needs to be able to sit over a fire. You will also need a long stick with which to move clothes out of the hot water, and to stir them in the wash water.

An alternative to the washboard is a domestic rubber sink or toilet plunger (clean of course). In the past a washing "dolly" was a short wooden pole with four or five wooden legs attached. These devices will easily agitate and beat clothes clean without having to rub using your hands; a lot easier for elders or those with hand problems.

Now, you're ready to start!

Build a good hot fire. Wait a little while and let it burn down a bit so that there are plenty of hot coals. Fashion a way that you can set the tub on the fire, keeping the fire underneath the tub. It is really best to have a tub with feet on it, but you can rig up a good set up using an old grill off of a BBQ or something. Even cinder blocks or large rocks can be used. While the fire is heating, you can separate your clothes, by color and by least to most dirty.

Fill two rinse tubs with cool, clean water, away from the fire.

Fill the wash tub about 2/3 with water. Let it heat until very hot, even boiling. You may even want to boil very dirty clothes like work pants, jeans or white socks. Add laundry soap. Remove carefully from the fire and to a table or to the ground. This normally takes two people.

Pretreat any stains as you normally would. Add your clothes to the hot water, starting with the least dirty ones first like shirts and underwear.

Be careful of burning your hands in the hot water! Rub the clothes on the washboard. Adding soap as needed. Rub then plunge, rub, then plunge.....remember Far and Away?

Take the hot clothes out of the wash water with your stick, place them in the first rinse. Rinse and wring as best as you can. Place the clothes in the second rinse, adding fabric softener or bluing if desired. Don't wear yourself out wringing, just hang up the clothes, dripping, outside. If it is in winter or rainy weather, you will have to wring them as well as you can.

Continue through the dirtiest clothes, re-using the wash water as many times as you can get away with it. Just re-heat it until you have to start over with clean water. You can use the second rinse water many, many times. The first rinse water will have to be changed frequently depending on how much soap you use.

When I get to the point that I need to change my wash water, I try to find something I can use it for instead of throwing it out. Usually I end up washing the porch, patio or outside of the house. You could wash your deck, boat, or dog kennel, I guess.

The key to clean clothes is plenty of elbow grease and plenty of rinsing! Happy Washing!

title: Self-Reliance Handbook/Washing Clothes


text:
User talk:Loplin~enwikibooks

Copyright problem with Image:Aasfstealth.gif
--Derbeth 17:49, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Loplin. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Loplin~enwikibooks that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:22, 17 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 05:12, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Loplin~enwikibooks


text:
User:Pureblade/Tests

Test initiated.

HIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!

Test complete.

title: User:Pureblade/Tests


text:
Category talk:Pages needing attention

Remove
 * LearnElectronics:Chapter9
 * LearnElectronics:Forward

from this list? QUITTNER 142.150.49.166 19:27, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Pages needing attention


text: User talk:195.239.101.209

title: User talk:195.239.101.209


text:
Openbravo POS/Quick tour

Overview
Run start.bat (win32) or start.sh (Unix) to start the Application.

This starts the application in a maximised window. It is possible to start the application in fullscreen mode as would likely be required in a deployment scenario. See below for further details.

The lower part of the screen lists all of the current valid accounts. By default, these are
 * Administrator
 * Manager
 * Employee
 * Guest

You can log in as any of these users by selecting the relevant icon. You will not be prompted for a password since all of the default accounts are created without a password.

Select the Administrator login

Once logged in as administrator, there are three collapsible panels on the left side of the screen. These are

This is where the basic point of sale operations take place. It is possible to record sales, issue refunds, close the cash for the trading period and create reports on the cash transactions.
 * Principal:

Here you can set up the product catalog and tax categories. You can also run miscellaneous reports (I assume these will be repositioned soon) and configure the basic application level objects (users, tables, floors and other resources).
 * Administration:

Here you can configure the behaviour of the application infrastructure. For example, the location of the persistent store (by default, a HSQL DB in your home directory), the printer properties and whether the application operates in fullscreen or windowed mode.
 * System:

User Management
From the administration panel on the left, select Configuration then Users. Here you can add, remove and edit the system users. To add a new user, select the third last icon from the top toolbar and fill in the values for Name and Role. You can optionally set the password and provide an image for this user.

You can delete the existing accounts by selecting them in the listbox and clicking the icon with the red cross. WARNING: There is no confirmation for any deletion!

To save all of your changes, select the last (save) icon from the toolbar.

Tax Management
From the administration panel, select Stock then Taxes. Here you can set up tax bands that will later be associated with products. This allows taxation calculations to be performed automatically.

Category Management
Managing the catalog consists of setting up categories and adding products to those categories. Note that To set up a category, go to the Administration panel and select Stock, then select <tt>Categories</tt>. The form layout is similar to the user management form. Select the <tt>New</tt> icon and fill in the values for ID and Category. Note that the category ID must be unique. If you reuse an ID you will receive the error message Notice: Cannot create a new record. If you select the <tt>Information</tt> button from the error dialog, you should see the following message net.adrianromero.data.loader.DataException: java.sql.SQLException: Unique constraint violation: in statement [insert into CATEGORIES (ID, NAME, IMAGE) values (?, ?, ?)]
 * 1) Categories cannot be nested
 * 2) Products can belong to at most one category

This is the databases way of telling you that you have reused an ID value.

Product Management
From the administration panel on the left, select <tt>Stock</tt> then <tt>Products</tt>. Here you can add, remove and edit products. To add a new product, select the third last icon from the top toolbar and fill in the values for <tt>Reference</tt>, <tt>Name</tt>, <tt>Buy Price</tt> and <tt>Sell Price</tt>. You can optionally specify values for <tt>Category</tt> and <tt>Tax</tt>. As with categories, the value for <tt>Reference</tt> must be unique. If you select the <tt>Catalog</tt> checkbox, the product will appear in to system users when they select the appropriate category.

Note: products cannot be added until a tax rate and a category has been created for them.

From the GENERAL tab, click STOCK.

Stock Cost per Year. Stock Volume. The starting count for this Product.

From the STOCK tab, click PROPERTIES

Auxiliar -           If this product is on consignment, check this field

Scale

Typical Workflow

 * Concept of closing cash
 * Procedure for ringing up sale
 * How TP interacts with
 * Barcode scanner
 * Cash Drawer
 * Credit card reader
 * Report generation

Bulk Operations

 * JDBC configuration
 * DB Schema layout
 * Sample bulk import procedure

-- !! How does one import a product list?

There are various applications out there that provide access to MySQL data

from EXCEL. One example is found at http://www.sobolsoft.com/excelmysql.

It is $29.00 for the full featured Excel Add-In, but it provides complete

IMPORT and EXPORT data flows - all the features of a spreadsheet, and all the

functionality of a database.

The free-est, cheapest method would be to key the Product data into a file (CSV

or some other data format), and then use the MySQL loader tools. PostgreSQL has

loader tools, too.

title: Openbravo POS/Quick tour


text:
Budget Watch Collecting/Watch battery interchange

SR=Silver Oxide LR=Alkaline. Silver can always be substituted for Alkaline, with a longer life. In some applications alkaline will not substitute for silver.

Older batteries made a distinction between low drain and high drain. Modern quality batteries can be used for either.

*1.35v mercury battery, no longer made--Silver and Alkaline are 1.5v, usually work. Note: If you've got more interchange information feel free to add it as plain text, someone will come and format it later.


text:
Talk:Software Engineers Handbook/Language Dictionary/COBOL

Contributors
Thanks to Arnold Trembley who submitted the original content by email. - Christine Frayda

Also, the vast majority of useful COBOL applications came thru the Y2K crisis just fine.
I don't know where to start with this statement. I just want to shake my head and scream here!

The reason why COBOL program made it through the Y2K era intact was due to a herculean effort on the part of thousands of software developers around the world who had to re-learn (or learn for the first time) COBOL, and the Y2K problems were fixed.

That the problems didn't show up was due to the fact that these people actually did their job they got paid to do: Fix Y2K problems.

See Y2K for some more details on this, but it was a very real problem. --Rob Horning 12:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)


text:
Folkstyle Wrestling/Basic Wrestling Strategy

Finding your style is one of the most important things to consider in wrestling. It will deteremine your stance, the moves you use, the strategy you choose, and the success you have. Your style should be based on a number of different factors, many of which will be discussed later in this book. However right now there are a few basic things to consider, and should serve as a guideline to help you come up with a basic strategy.
 * Finding Your Philosophy, Finding Your style:

 * 1) What are your strengths? Are you a great athlete?  Are you really strong?  Are you extremely bright?  A great athlete will be able to do more complicated moves, whereas someone who is really strong might want to focus on a few basic power moves.  Someone who is extremely bright might try to outmaneuver their opponent into an advantageous position.
 * 2) What are your weaknesses? Do you have trouble with balance? Do you have trouble being aggressive? Are you slower than other wrestlers?  This book aims to help you eliminate most of your weaknessess; however, it is impossible to eliminate all of your weaknesses.  In a match, you should do everything possible to avoid dealing with your weaknessess, then in practice, you should work to eliminate these weaknesses.

 * High Vs. Low Percentage moves
 * The Clock
 * When to be Aggressive

Note: Richard Salamone has generously agreed to let us use any of his posts from the MMA.tv forum, in this section I will put relevant post, which will be edited into book form once the whole book has been outlined.

What moves to use
FloorFighter,

I am not sure where you are at in your training, but before focusing on "moves", learn the so-called basic movements of wrestling. These prepare you for learning "moves."

With regard to what is most efficient and most sensible to learn, that does depend on body build (e.g., relatively tall or short), speed (e.g., quick or not), how much of your training you are willing to devote (e.g., BJJ and MMA types will have different goals, e.g., to perhaps mostly defend takedowns vs. initiate leg shot and to also develop some pummeling/cliniching proficiency), etc.

Ultimately, for maximum success, you need to be exposed to a wide variety of technique primarily to be familiar enough so that it is not a surprise and you can defend against it. You don't, however, need to develop zillions of techiques to be proficient and, in fact, as you are learning, it is my opinion, that it is wiser to focus on a few techniques and set-ups for them and work the heck out of them than "be a jack of all trades and a master of none." A good double leg, single leg, a few good tie-ups, pummeling/clinch (with attacks such at front headlock), and defense will get you pretty far.

You don't have to be "unique" to be successful, only good, and good at the basics is a good place to start to be good.

Lee Kemp was a three (I think) time world freestyle champ with a good single, good ties, and good defense. Boring to watch, yes, but he could get that single on anybody at least once during a match and would typically win by a point or two or three in generally very low scoring matches (in world competition).

Good luck in your training.


text:
Rhetoric and Composition/Grammar

What is Grammar?
Grammar is the study of how words and their component parts combine to form sentences. Grammar is the scientific study of language that includes morphology (also "accidence" or the forms that words take) and syntax (the relation of the words to other words). Grammar also involves the study of the different parts or elements of speech (for example nouns, verbs, adjectives, etc.), the relations between those elements. A knowledge of grammar provides a vocabulary to discuss how the language works.

Need some help?

 * St. Cloud State University has a great website that is very useful for writers called LEO: http://leo.stcloudstate.edu.

It is especially great because it is written based on college writing. It is quite in depth and is broken down into many categories so a writer can find what they need. Access is available for anyone, not limited to students of St. Cloud State University.

 * A writer can use many different reference tools through St. Cloud State University's website. Among these references includes free access to the Oxford English Dictionary. Go to http://lrts.stcloudstate.edu.

Click the "Library" link then the "Online References Resources" drop down menu. Here, there will be a list of many useful resources. Some of these resources are limited to student only use.

title: Rhetoric and Composition/Grammar


text:
FHSST Biology/Contents/Index/TCMS/Cells and genetics/Cell structure

History of Cells Cells have often been called the building blocks of life, and are indeed found to be the basis of everything we generally classify as life (viruses are their own special category). Cells were discovered by a British scientist named Robert Hooke in 1665. The name was originally applied to cells found in a cork! These "cells" looked like little compartments, similar to the living quarters of monks which were called cells. Much later on, two German scientists discovered the connection between life and cells. Matthias Schleiden discovered plants are made of cells, while Theodor Schwann realized animals are composed of cells. We have since learned that bacteria are composed of single cells (unicellular), while more complex forms of life are multicellular.

Cell Theory

The ideas of Schleiden and Schwann helped shape modern biology. From them we have derived a set of rules for living things. This is known as the "cell theory."
 * An organism is composed of a least one cell. All living things, from unicellular bacteria to complex humans have at least one cell.
 * The cell is basic building block of the organism. It is the lowest organizational structure of all living things.
 * All cells come from previous cells. Cells are made from other cells during a process known as cellular division.

All living things follow these rules (though there are controversial exceptions to these rules).

Types of Cells

There are two types of cells that we see in living things. A prokaryotic cell lacks a nucleus and is not as complicated as a eukaryotic cell. Prokaryotes, organisms consisting of prokaryotic cells, are usually unicellular. Eukaryotes, on the other hand, normally consist of many cells working together. Both structures are surrounded by a membrane, but a eukaryote has organelles. Organelles are sub-units inside the cell with their own membrane, and a specific function (such as producing food for the cell). The largest organelle in a eukaryote is the nucleus, which acts as a control center for the cell.


text: User talk:152.135.235.188

title: User talk:152.135.235.188


text:
User talk:203.10.121.82

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikibooks. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

title: User talk:203.10.121.82


text: User talk:70.226.136.246

title: User talk:70.226.136.246


text:
User talk:58.104.228.147

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikibooks. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you.

title: User talk:58.104.228.147


text:
User:Titopao

For more information about me, see my user page on Wikipedia.

title: User:Titopao


text:
Talk:QoS 2.5 - Advanced Traffic Shaping for IPCop

=Classes and Bandwidth= A way needs to be established of how to calculate how to set the bandwidth (min and max) of each class.

=Settings=

If any one disputes the values given please feel free to change them if you can justify the values.


text:
User:Cormaggio/Wikipedia as a learning community (edit)

Wikipedia as a learning community: content, conflict and the ‘common good’

 * Author: Cormac Lawler
 * Edited version of Wikimania05/Paper-CL1
 * Licensed under CC-BY

''Cormac Lawler is User:Cormaggio in various Wikimedia projects (mainly the English Wikipedia). Currently between Masters and PhD in the field of education and media communities. Contact: cormaggio [at] yahoo.co.uk / gmail.com''

Abstract
''This paper looks at aspects of Wikipedia’s structure and process, with specific focus on its community (or organisational) learning. Learning is conceptualised as a collective, collaborative process, whereby multiple perspectives are shared and meanings are constructed. Fundamental to this learning are Wikipedia’s policies and the procedure of collaboration in an often conflicting environment. Conflict is viewed as a key component in the process of creating the content of Wikipedia as well as a key factor in people’s participation in the project. A case study of conflict is presented, of which the focus is on how individual users communicate their opinions and feelings to other users and how these communications are read and/or understood by individuals and/or the community, especially in the light of it being mainly a text-only medium. How experiences are shared between and within projects is seen as a crucial factor in its organisational learning – Wikipedia as an organisation has both traditional and radical features, but its learning, as well as so many other aspects of its proclaimed success, is seen to be predicated on its structure, as well as its policies. Recommendations are made to improve its learning as an organisation as well that of individuals, through the idea and praxis of a learning community.''

Keywords: learning community, online community, collaboration, conflict, constructivism, organisational learning

Introduction
Wikipedia, the multilingual, open-content, collaborative encyclopedia, has gone from strength to strength. In four-and-a-half years it has grown to contain over two million articles in over 200 languages, and counting. The idea of collaborative-building of an encyclopedia was seeded by its predecessor Nupedia, operated by an expert-only peer-review system and where the idea of a wiki (user-editable) system was implemented, which sparked its flourishing into the sprawling organism it is today, the biggest encyclopedia in the world. Despite its astonishing size, my main focus of this study resides in analyzing three aspects of Wikipedia as a learning process, specifically the organisation, structure and modus operandi of Wikipedia. I am not focusing exclusively on Wikipedia, but also its sister projects (see fig. 1) and its parent, the Wikimedia Foundation (a non-profit organisation, currently registered in U.S., France and Germany, with plans underway for others). Data for this research is mainly obtained from (1) the content and discussion pages from English Wikipedia and Meta, discussions related to Wikipedia, and mailing lists.

Fig. 1 – Wikimedia Foundation projects * (No. of language projects in brackets)

 * Wikimedia Foundation (14)
 * Wikipedia (203)
 * Wiktionary (70)
 * Wikisource (56)
 * Wikiqoute (36)
 * Wikibooks (34)
 * Wikinews (12)
 * Commons (48)
 * Wikispecies (24)
 * Meta (34)

* excluding defunct 9/11 memorial

My overarching reason for writing this paper is to make recommendations to the community for improving its practice, ie the collaborative writing of an encyclopedia. My objective is, by the end of this paper, to have convinced both the ‘non-Wikipedian’ reader that Wikipedia is a model worth serious consideration, and also the Wikipedian that the good start that has been made needs to be reinforced, or even in parts, restructured. In so doing, I want to redress the imbalance noted by Feenberg (2004) in that previous studies of online communities have tended to describe the workings of the community for an external audience without addressing the needs of the communities or their participants themselves. I also, most importantly, hope to frame the discourse of Wikipedia in terms of it actually being a learning community, rather than as a model, or way of looking at it.

While Wikipedia is not constructed or conceived as a learning environment per se, it does have some interesting characteristics of one. In this paper, I will frame the activities of its users in the light of the theory around learning communities, learning organisations and communities of practice. All of these have their own particularities and they all overlap in parts, but all, I think, are present in the continued work and functioning of Wikipedia. I shall therefore look at each area, in an attempt to come to a better understanding of how best to synthesise them.

Communities of practice
Wenger and Snyder (2000) say that communities of practice: 1) set their own agendas (self-organising), 2) are open to all who are willing to participate (self-selective) and 3) learn and grow through time and hence reinforce their strengths and capabilities (self-perpetuating). Unlike many other online communities, Wikipedia exists for a definite purpose and very real work is being done continuously, as I write and as you read, making it more like other work-based communities of practice than an online discussion group, for example. Wikipedia’s goal, its raison d’etre, is very simply to create and distribute an encyclopedia to every single person on the planet in a language they can easily understand (WMF:Main Page) or, in the classic phrase, “of the people, for the people”. This overlaps with the second point above which characterises the entirely voluntary membership of Wikipedia, and which goes for all of its languages and their subprojects (eg. finding sources, article translations – themselves ‘semi-communities’), as well as of course its sister projects (ie. Wiktionary etc.), placing Wikipedia in a straddling role between the Tönnies' (1887) classic demarcation of community and civil society. It also goes somewhat for roles within the communities, like adminship or membership of the dispute resolution process, although these are based on community approval and usually involve a vote. The third point, of course, is the difficult one, and the one I will be focusing on here. To what extent does ‘growth’ and ‘learning’ take place within the community at large and in the smaller communities within this/these communities, and how does it work or can it be done? These are my research questions.

Growth (in size at least) is easily quantified (Voss, 2005); learning, however, is not. But what, at least, do contributors to Wikipedia feel they have learned? To this question, I have been told (apart from “reams of trivia”): how to do research, how to write better academically, how to read and write better in another language, how to get on with and work with members of another culture and to be generally critical of the media in its presentation of information (Lawler, 2005).

Organisations, leadership and learning
“Hierarchical authority,” writes Peter Senge (1996), “(..) tends to evoke compliance, not foster commitment” (p. 2). Citing Argyris (1994), he claims that the problems of traditional organisations are that they stifle potentially damaging information for self-preservation purposes, when in fact this is precisely the kind of information that is needed for their development. He then goes on to advocate the conception of new types of leadership in order to improve the flow of communication

While Wikipedia does have a somewhat hierarchical system, ie. project administrators, mediation and arbitration committees (on the English Wikipedia) and a board of trustees overseeing the Wikimedia foundation, it offsets this with a decentralised structure throughout. Except for occasional foundation decisions, it is possible to take part in any discussion on policy, directly upon arrival to Wikipedia, whether logged in or not. It is also possible to apply for adminship of any project, once proof of sufficiently substantial edits is given, in many cases after only a month or so of contributing. Essentially, Wikipedia is a composite of many structural systems (M:Power structure) to go alongside the view of a completely open, flat system (Aigrain, 2003). But its openness is still its most basic, enduring and all-pervasive quality (Lawler, 2005) and how, in the final analysis, it must be viewed.

Of course, no discussion of the leadership of Wikipedia is complete without reference to its co-founder Jimmy (Jimbo) Wales. Other co-founder Larry Sanger left after Wikipedia’s first year, having contributed greatly to its workings and principles (at that time), and continues to play an ‘outsider’ role (Sanger, 2004); but it is still very much Wales who retains a uniquely central role in Wikipedia/Wikimedia. His title is disputed (by himself, mainly), but Wales does retain special rights in ultimately safeguarding the project in maintaining its goals and values. He remains quite self-deprecating about his role, and tends to make minimal intrusion into community process; as Anthere wrote on the wikipedia-l mailing list:

 * “I think a project of such a type can only work without a strong authority. It is important to let people build their own organisation. Jimbo has this very powerful strength, in that he lets most of the organisation be a self-organisation. For those who know a bit about leadership, it is a rather rare occurence.” (23/05/05, ed. C.L., my emphasis, from
 * http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikipedia-l/2005-April/039181.html)

Essentially, leadership is an open invitation in Wikipedia, and dependent upon people taking roles within the organisation as spelled out by Senge (1996, 2003). Philippe Aigrain (2003) states that the success of analogous ‘information communities’ depend on certain people playing certain roles, such as by referring to useful information, moderating (eg. conflict), challenging opinions etc. We are encouraged to "be bold" and to take matters into our own hands. Also, the praxis of this community is such that it pays to help each other and point out interesting pages, discussions, or simply beautiful images, thus taking from Bordieu's notion of cultural capital or, in a current guise, the gift economy. We help each other - I have said so on my user page and I see my role thus far as being a "questioner" in Wikipedia, which explains the approach taken in my research and the reason I am writing this paper (W:User:Cormaggio).

Learning communities
Pedagogy has been steadily changing over the last fifty years to reflect the growing view of both knowledge and learning as socially constructed (Cuthell, 2002). Consequently, a drive to make learning more socially situated has begun, with more of a focus on student-student interaction than student-teacher, in order to make it easier for students to share experiences, give each other feedback and learn from each other. A learning community is therefore, rather unsurprisingly, a specifically constructed community of learners.

Greene (2005) says that taking part in a learning community “allows learning to be contextual and social, as well as distributed” (p. 7). Contextual means that learning is situated in the context of where it is learned, eg. operating a machine, in a classroom, on a mailing list etc. The communal element is what makes the learning both social and distributed, in that the experience is shared and collaborative; in this respect the notion of a ‘cohort group’ is useful, in the sense of it being mutually supportive and a potential place for personal growth (Tisdell et al., 2004).

I see many (even, perhaps, any) groups in Wikipedia as being such cohort groups. There are mini-projects within the various language projects that focus on specific tasks, whether it be finding references, improving coverage of a field of study or helping to translate articles or messages between languages. All of these are kinds of cohort groups, and all are potentially learning communities. For instance, a project grew for a while between the Balkan (and environs) Wikipedias to work on a way of representing the past decade of conflict there in a neutral manner, acceptable to differing cultural points of view. The project has since petered out, but is just one example of a group of people coming together to work on a common problem. Potentially, this could be said about any content page in Wikipedia, where the principle of neutrality is constantly negotiated, though itself, in the words of Jimmy Wales, “non-negotiable” (W:NPOV).

Another continuously developing project is the software, the underlying architecture of Wikipedia. Like all open-source software, MediaWiki, upon which all Wikimedia projects run, (W:MediaWiki) is itself freely downloadable and editable. Lawrence Lessig (2004) says the openness of the internet, and particularly open source technology, gives people the opportunity to “tinker” and thereby learn through experience about writing, designing and producing media by and for themselves. Tinkering is also central to Eric Raymond’s (2000) view of creativity and freedom in decentralised collective working; even the byline for MediaWiki, “Because ideas want to be free”, reinforces this message.

So, stated above are some notions of what constitute the major components of the theory on the area of community and learning and how Wikimedia projects may relate. But the questions now arise: does learning actually take place, and if so, how and to what extent? A further, more practical question from my perspective in writing this paper is, what are the learning opportunities in Wikipedia?

Wikipedia: learning opportunities
Apart from the dynamics of distributed learning-through-discovery, the main potential for learning, in my opinion, is conflict. Conflict arises for many reasons in many guises, whether through difference of culture, ideology or belief, or simple misunderstanding, prevalent in a text-only medium. It may be about the presentation of content in a partisan manner, or whether a particular piece of information or image etc. should be there at all. It is the main source of heat generated in the project and comprises a huge part of the general discussion that I have seen. These conflicts often spill over into flames or edit wars, sometimes with little or no discussion on potential solutions, but simple deadlock. This is where third parties come in, sometimes voluntarily by themselves, or else by request to comment on, or directly mediate/arbitrate in the dispute.

The words conflict and dispute connote negative images, often justifiably so, though sometimes not. Conflict can be very much constructive or at least productive, depending on the form it takes. Reagle (2004) warns against “facile agreement” in the avoiding of conflict within Wikipedia, and says that it bears the potential for sharing perspectives. A conflict, by nature, comprises multiple perspectives and is thus an opportunity for debate but depends on whether the nature of the conflict is constructive or destructive. In fact, a destructive conflict should be viewed as an extreme form of discussion, even if discussion has broken down. The way to solve a dispute is through discussion; this is fundamental to the general community and, in particular, the Mediation Committee (W:Mediation).

Discussion is the basic state of Wikipedia, between talk pages, mailing lists and IRC channels, and it is as such that the notion of a place of perspective-sharing comes into its own. Returning to the concept of leadership advocated by Senge (1996), the role of leaders is to make sure that communication is happening throughout the organisation; if we transpose this concept to the completely decentralised structure of Wikipedia, we can see that everyone has the potential to take on any one of these leadership roles and consequently to form and frame the work of the community as a whole.

A major aspect of discussion/communication, certainly in a multilingual environment, is that of cultural background. Cross-cultural communication literature is already a big part of business practice, but it is growing within the field of education. Liebkind and McAlister (1999) conducted a study whereby students engaged in story-telling about other countries and cultures and consequently were significantly less xenophobic than students in schools who had not taken part in the activity. It would be interesting to do some research on this in Wikipedia, to see if this finding bore out, but of primary interest (to me at least) is how the discourse of Wikipedia is conducted and how cultural issues are dealt with, and how language is used. As Ferdinand Tönnies (1887) says, “language has not, as we all know, been ‘invented’ or somehow agreed upon as a mere tool for making ourselves understood; it is the very act of understanding at work, both in form and content”. (p. 33) Particularly in the text-based medium of computer-mediated-communication, the language used is crucial to coming to consensus in a conflicting territory.

Finally, being involved in a project such as Wikipedia requires the development of critical thinking, as is often repeated. Wikipedia is a filtering process in the age of information (WMF:Quarto2 letter), and to decide what is eligible and appropriate to enter requires critical faculties. I think that being critical also requires one to be open to criticism of oneself and to avoid defensive reasoning, which according to Argyris (1991) “encourages individuals to keep private the premises, inferences, and conclusions that shape their behavior and to avoid testing them in a truly independent, objective fashion” (p. 103).

Conflict: a case study
One example (among many) this year of conflict and cross-cultural issues was a dispute over the representation of the Cassini-Huygens telescope launched into space as a collaborative venture between US and European scientists. Anthere claimed on the wikiEN-l mailing list that some French scientists had mentioned to her that the represented format of the event on the English Wikipedia was subtly but noticeably biased against the European-built Huygens probe. This point was contested as either being either irrelevant or unfair, and the issue became a dispute, in parts personal and, to an extent, nationalistic. I have presented key points from the participants, taking excellent but not specifically related points out, and for the sake of style and clarity, I have edited some of the comments themselves. Also, since it was discussed in this thread, and having asked the question myself in another, I think there is no benefit from disguising the names of those involved, or more practically, no way of referencing this discussion without identifying its participants (Bruckman, 2002). I also do not wish to cause offence to anyone by bringing this debate out into the open again, but rather think of it as a strong case of perspective sharing, misunderstanding, apology and resolution.

Anthere (15th Jan, 05)
 * I am sure it was not done on purpose at all. This is just a view of things so different between one culture and another.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018348.html

Stan Shebs (15th Jan, 05):
 * I think you're working a bit too hard to find bias here. (..) The "bias" is that we work on what interests us. I've been digging figures of European history out of 1911EB lately, and half the time it's the first information about these in any language WP. We're just perennially short of people to do all the things we would like to get done.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018353.html

Anthere (15th Jan, 05)
 * No I am not working too hard. (..) If we want to be perceived reasonably neutral, we just have to pay attention to this type of details. That's all what I would like to say. Consider it crap if you wish.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018355.html

Stan Shebs (15th Jan, 05)
 * This is absolutely nothing to do with NPOV, and it's unfair to hardworking editors to say that they're biased and not doing anything about it. What you report fits exactly into the worst stereotypes of the French; sneering at other people's work, but not taking any responsibility for having let this perceived problem go unmentioned for years. You said these scientists “know Wikipedia”; did you ask them why they didn’t do anything about it themselves?

(..)
 * There are enough real problems making WP unbiased and neutral; by taking a trivial point of organization never before discussed anywhere, and holding it up as something that matters, you're undercutting all the editors who put in real research and real discussion time on the issues that are genuinely important. Why should I bother spending two hours in the library to research a substantive question, when you're telling the world that WP is biased because some frontpage article doesn't cater enough to nationalistic pride?

 * The whole attitude really troubles me. I've put in a lot of WP time over the past two years, and now it feels like it doesn't matter.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018393.html

Anthere (15th Jan, 05): (..)
 * We are all biaised, and little can be done about this.

(..)
 * But yes, why would I even neglect my whole family and personal job as well as personal health by lack of sleep to try to take care of a project, and try to make it the best possible and the least biased possible, when you are telling me that my opinion has no importance whatsoever, is fantasm and only nationalistic pride ?

(..)
 * I can understand that some of you just do not see where the problem is and think I am just nut. That is okay, you can consider I am nut and that there is no bias here. I can accept that. This is exactly where the problems stand when we come to lack of neutrality. One editor considers one point of view and another will not necessarily see the same point of view at all. And this is exactly why we have edit wars, because the second will just not recognise the validity of the first one view and will just refuse that the other one could have a piece of truth in his hands. That is fine. What is not fine is to resort to personal comments on those having a perception that you do not share, and try to lower the possible validity of what they say by resorting of calling her "French".

 * I feel quite upset by your comment. If you wish to close your eyes to internal comments, or to attack those of us who try to point out to what is not perfect, do not be suprised when there is criticism from public audience.

 * I apologize to those who participated to the article if they feel I criticized their work. I did not.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018398.html

Puddl Duk (15th Jan, 05)
 * 'Point of views' in one's mind are shaped with communal information. Communication is the only way to approach a common reality.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018402.html

Stan Shebs (16th Jan, 05)
 * (Re: Anthere’s original comment)
 * It's a very very bad thing to say to people who take issues of bias and npov seriously (..) This is a public mailing list; all the messages are carefully archived forever, then carefully indexed by Google, and if past experience is any guide, there's a good chance that your initial message will be brought out as support for one side or another in an edit war. (..)

 * A question as simple as "why doesn't the Huygens probe have its own article?" is usually enough to spur a flurry of edits by knowledgeable people. Those of us who are serious about bias will drop everything else to look at that sort of thing and try to fix it. I think that's part of why your original comment hurts; I've sacrificed a bunch of time working on subjects that I personally don't enjoy, just to try to address other people's claims of bias.

 * (Re: ‘French stereotypes’)
 * I thought hard about whether to include this, and I fear I was misinterpreted. I personally don't have this feeling; I love France, would go more often if I could, and since November I'm wondering if I could emigrate there. (..)

 * I'm sorry to have upset you, that was not my intent.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018415.html

Zoney 18/01/05:
 * (Re: Bias)
 * It's a huge problem I think, and one of Wikipedia's biggest to overcome. And denying that it is there is absurd. And I'm not laying the blame solely with US wikipedians, far from it - US bias is just more apparant (to non-US editors) because there are more US editors than not (or than any other single category). I have no doubt there are a minority of articles biased against the US which have perhaps only received non-US editors. And speaking for myself I can for sure point out one or two Irish articles which have been biased by Irish editors for example.
 * http://mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-January/018482.html

Though this exchange was relatively short (compared to, say, the infamous debates over images and censorship), I think most people involved showed a great measure of maturity and thinking about one another’s perspective, even if it did cause offence. What’s interesting about this exchange for me primarily is that it was rich in emotion and honesty. Of course the content of the dispute, ie. (systemic) bias in the English Wikipedia, is vital to the community, but this issue is a long-standing one and not one likely to have been resolved immediately.

Like religion, issues of national identity are likely to inflame passions, and this is what happened here (as it has again very recently, in not dissimilar circumstances). Stan’s comments were thoughtful but potentially hurtful, since he himself was hurt, and this made for a heated discussion. Anthere’s comments were full of her characteristic fire, but more importantly, her humanity. Brian tried to diffuse the situation by denying a national bias and tried to inject some humour. And Zoney’s comment was a good indication of the wider picture and a restatement of the difficulty in avoiding bias.

It is exchanges like this that I think are perfect for learning. They include emotional honesty, cultural sensitivity and humility when appropriate. It is an example of the daily discourse within Wikipedia (though, obviously, not all debates will play out like this one), but it is also an indication of the measure by which Wikipedia may be judged, ie. as a culturally sensitive resource and/or community. Potentially, it could serve as a warning to contributors to the issues around cultural identity and bias, though this would need further research. Ultimately though, this discussion shows the dominant discourse of Wikipedia to be centred on neutral and balanced representation and finding the consensus to do so.

Building Wikipedia
The construction of an online community is usefully conceptualised under Jenny Preece’s (2001) notions of sociability and usability, or in other words, how much consideration exists for people’s potential interaction with the community and its technology or modus operandi. “The focus of sociability”, Preece says, “is human-human interaction supported by technology” (p. 349) whereas usability is more concerned with how easy it is to access, navigate and retrieve information from and about the community. I particularly find her suggestions for supporting online social interaction (Preece, 2003) to be inherent insights into understanding the praxis of learning in Wikipedia.

Sociability is achieved in many ways on Wikipedia, mainly through logging in and creating a user page (or, at least, a username) by which you can be recognised and contacted. There are many other modes of communication, eg. mailing lists as stated above, but there are also other ways of getting to know people such as Facebook on English Wikipedia (W:Facebook). This has been shown to be important for the affective needs of participants (eg. Sunal et al., 2003) as well as being a way to introduce oneself and outline topics/fields of interest/expertise, both of which have recently been discussed on the mailing lists. On the mode of discussion, apart from IRC, Wikipedia is an asynchronous format, but, in setting up a watchlist, its functionality allows for quick feedback, another of Sunal et al.’s (2003) criteria for successful online learning community building. Issues of sociability will undoubtedly prove relevant to the development of the upcoming e-learning resource, currently known as Wikiversity.

As outlined above, Wikipedia is being constantly constructed, new versions of its code being released with regularity. This continual flux is just how Vannevar Bush (1945) saw the practice of information storage in his classic essay As we may think when he says,

 * “a record, if it is to be useful to science, must be continuously extended, it must be stored, and above all it must be consulted. (..) Even if utterly new recording procedures do not appear, these present ones are certainly in the process of modification and extension.”

Wikipedia is not only a continuously evolving resource, but also a continuously evolving entity in site, structure and community. Feenberg (2004) says that new media have to be seen as a process, not as a finished product, lest they become the sole preserve of experts. I am fully aware that this will ring alarm bells in the pro-expertise camp, but this is missing the point: that a developing media should not be fully conceptualised while it is still in process which is very much the case in Wikipedia, as it is the view of many of its users (Lawler, 2005)

Reflection and meta-cognition
Probably the most useful model of learning is that put forward by Kolb and others which views the process as a cycle going from 1) experience, to 2) reflection, to 3) abstract conceptualisation, to 4) active experimentation leading back again to experience (Gibbs, 1988). In plainer terms, this means learning from an experience through a process of reflection and relating past thinking to the experience in order to inform further experiences or practice. Reflective practice is key to understanding our own actions, and thereby learning from them. As Paulo Freire puts it, “Critical reflection on practice is a requirement of the relationship between theory and practice” (Freire, 1998, p. 30) – otherwise, theory becomes meaningless and practice, mindless.

The existence of Meta, and the call for papers for Wikimania itself, is evidence enough of a reflective stance within the larger community (M:Main page; WM:Call for papers). Interestingly, Anthere said that taking part in Meta can take the strain away from contributing to Wikipedia, which can be stressful due to having to write an acceptably neutral opinion; on Meta it is not obligatory (or even advisable) to write from a neutral perspective, but rather to write freely on any aspect of the projects, like where there is a problem, and how it could be improved, or philosophical or sociological aspects of Wikipedia, like for instance the structure of power (M:Power structure; M:Wikipedia:Sociology). This kind of meta-discussion forum is an essential ingredient of what Bieber et al. (2002) call for in their proposals for the evolution of knowledge communities. Wikipedia also answers the call by Ripamonti et al. (2005) for online communities to work out their usage and performance (W:Statistics), and this is open to anyone who has the technical ability (or time and patience to learn) to hack into the MediaWiki software, currently undertaken by Erik Zachte.

Commenting on the internet's influence on our perceptions of time, Ilkka Tuomi (2002) wrote: “On the net we live in dog years, but our memory is that of an elephant” (cited in Holtgrewe, 2004, p. 131). In terms of memory, the transparent structure of Wikipedia does offset this substantially, but the challenge is to maintain the collective memory of the community to continue the process of reflection, and hence, learning. The crucial point here though is that the community continues to be critical of itself and make sense of its various experiences in order to reinforce the quality of its future practice and discourse.

Conclusions
Central, I believe, to the success of Wikipedia is the nature of its participation and the behaviour of its contributors. Much of these issues is covered in policy and guidelines, but much of it comes down to why people get involved and how. The reasons for contributing to Wikipedia are many (Lawler, 2005; W:Wikipedia:Who&Why) and it is clear that many of its most active contributors consider it to be an essential part of their lives, restated around the May 2005 appointment of Foundation officers by Vice-Chair of the board, Florence Nibart-Devouard (Anthere) and the then Chief Research Officer, Erik Möller (Eloquence).

Set against this, however, is possibly the fear of messing up an article, due to lack of language proficiency or knowledge in the area - issues which were raised in the conflict case study mentioned above (though not reproduced here). Chris Allen (2005) also wrote on people's attitudes to participation:

 * “One interesting possible barrier of entry to active participation in a wiki is what I call the "wiki editing dichotomy". You have to be proud enough to believe what you are contributing is generally worthwhile to others (or at least worth your effort), but you also have to be humble enough to understand that others can improve it. I don't know of many other collaborative media that requires both pride and humility.”

Militantly meritocratic, Eric Raymond (2003) states bluntly, “attitude is no substitute for competence”. I differ in that I think the key is to temper the meritocracy of Wikipedia (no bad thing in itself) with an appreciation of the cultural value of the individual and the role that each brings with them to the project. It seems to me that Wikipedia, as a project built on the spirit of cooperation, will only succeed in an atmosphere of openness and, crucially, listening. I believe I have shown its good side to a large extent, but any contributor to the Wikimedia community (especially, it seems the English Wikipedia) will be aware of the destructive and sometimes hurtful quality of comments made, or even ignored.

Further work on Wikipedia

Research in and on Wikipedia is gaining momentum, as people, myself included, flock to it as a fascinating case study in the era of the internet. The incentive for Wikipedia to itself do internal research is ever-growing as the English Wikipedia’s recent drive to initiate article validation, after the success of the German Wikipedia in producing a DVD of its best content. The Wikimedia research network is further evidence of a consolidated effort to gain understanding about the various projects and how best their technical and social needs may be met (M: Wikimedia Research Network). This study has been more of an overall reading of the literature and how it applies to Wikipedia but I also hope to have shed some light on its process, particularly conflict, to improve or at least inform its future practice. Further research needs to be done in many areas, in both quantitative and especially qualitative studies. Qualitative studies are often quite complex and raise important ethical issues, like disclosure of identity, which I have chosen to do here after consultation with the main participants and in the light of Bruckman's (2002) ideas on publishing and publicity. But the crucial point is that we continually inquire into and reflect upon our own practice, in order to better understand it and improve on it for the future.

Findings from the literature on online communities and learning communities are still tentative, but it would be interesting to put a number of them to the test. For instance, Norris (2002) found that online community participation did not have much significant positive effect on contacts across social divides, but that it did across age-gaps – is this the case in Wikipedia? And what about across cultures and, particularly, ideologies? How do projects/communities cross-fertilise each other and do people shy away from some projects and not others? (Stacey, Smith and Barty, 2004) And in terms of Wikipedia really being a learning community and its participants cohort learners, Sujo de Montes, Oran and Willis (2002) ask, “How do we encourage some students to find their voices and speak powerfully and others to find their ears and learn to listen?” (p. 269) These, alongside the many other questions raised on (WM:Call for papers) will serve to enrich and strengthen the process of collaborative working and learning.

Therefore, I make here a number of recommendations that could contribute to the learning of the community overall:

 * Learning to become a core competency in the Wikipedia community
 * Recognition of the importance of constructive conflict
 * Research to explore relationships between projects and possibilities for sharing perspectives and learning
 * ‘Lessons learnt’ pages to be created and maintained on Meta

The main work in Wikipedia and all other Wikimedia projects is to continue to work in a collaborative and open sense and, I believe, with the attitude of shared learning. This for me is Wikipedia's strongest asset and the most radical answer to Larry Sanger's and others' criticisms of Wikipedia regarding expertise - that in building a product of excellence, Wikipedia is also building a learning community where leadership is decentralised and expertise is distributed and in so doing creating a new kind of academic community, as already suggested to me by a participant in my previous study (Lawler, 2005). But as it develops its own mode of discourse (Lamerichs & Te Molder, 2003) and its own critical viewpoint, it must make sure that this experience is synthesised into something explicitly useful to the community - we must balance our desire for ongoing distributed learning (or "editor education", as Tony Sidaway (2005) suggests) with documented information, ie through 'lessons learnt', by which newcomers can themselves learn from Wikipedians' previous experiences. As Lehtinen (2002) puts it:

 * “Knowledge structures based solely on informal and “tacit” knowledge can be very inflexible and provide only limited opportunities for continuous knowledge advancement, typical for dynamic expertise. On the other hand, high-level expert performances cannot be adequately described as individual accomplishments since they are typically based on the use of socially and physically distributed resources. Correspondingly, the view of learning that focuses only on the cultivation of individual minds may be too narrow when developing teaching–learning environments for supporting the development of expertise.” (p. 110)

This emphasises the communal nature of learning, which I believe to be central to both the praxis, progress and even the very notion of Wikipedia. But it also poses us a challenge in making explicit this collective memory whereby the newbies have just as much a chance of benefiting from the community as do the old-timers.


text: Template:User linux

title: Template:User linux


text: Template:Userbox

title: Template:Userbox


text: Category:Linux users

title: Category:Linux users


text:
Immigrating to Canada/Citizenship

Introduction
Benefits of having citizenship include:
 * the ability to vote.
 * the ability to run for office.
 * can receive a number of government benefits.
 * status in the country cannot be revoked.

There are three ways of getting citizenship:
 * 1) born in Canada
 * 2) born to parents with Canadian citizenship
 * 3) naturalization.

Those who successfully obtained permanent resident status will lose that status upon gaining citizenship.

Forms
Adult
 * Application for Citizenship (Adult) [Form CIT 0002]
 * Document Checklist [Form CIT 0462]

Children
 * Application for Canadian Citizenship (Minors) [Form CIT 0003]
 * Document Checklist [Form CIT 0463]

All applicants
 * Citizenship Photo Specifications [Form CIT 0021]

Test - "A Look at Canada"
All applicants between the age of 18 and 59 are required to pass a test regarding the many aspects of Canada. This includes basics on how the government works, as well as geography such as location and names of cities and provinces.

title: Immigrating to Canada/Citizenship


text:
Guide to Unix/Explanations

This part of the guide contains a list of various topics which introduce and explain the use and administration of Unix-like systems.

There is an attempt to organise the subpages into parts.

Part 1: Command Line

 * /Shell Prompt/ introducing the shell, commands, and arguments
 * /Quoting and Filename Expansion/
 * /Pipes and Job Control/
 * /Signals/
 * /Choice of Shell/
 * /Environment/ environment variables and process limits
 * /Connecting to Remote Unix/ accessing remote shells and files

Part 2: Common Programs

 * /Scheduling Jobs/ at, cron
 * /Introduction to Editors/ available text editors
 * more
 * less
 * chmod
 * chgrp
 * cut
 * sort
 * sed
 * awk
 * /bc/ utility for arbitrary-precision arithmetic
 * ../roff/ text formatting, often for manual pages

Part 3: Administration

 * /Becoming Root/ su and sudo for running commands as the root user
 * /Installing Packages/ binary packages from your OS-vendor

Part 4: Hardware

 * /Determining Hardware/ what hardware is my system using?
 * /Filesystems and Swap/ mounting disks, formatting and mounting disk images
 * /Partitioning Disks/ creating and editting partition maps
 * /Compact Discs/ playing audio, ripping with cdparanoia, burning with cdrecord

Part 5: Networking

 * /Interprocess Communication/ pipes, sockets, packets, local versus network
 * /Real Networking Interfaces/ Ethernet, PPP, wireless
 * /Fake Networking Interfaces/ loopback, bridges, encapsulation
 * This list needs more topics.

Part 6: Electronic Mail

 * /Mail Server Overview/ Incoming Mail, Outgoing Mail, Local Mail, Client Connectivity
 * /Mail Server Related Terminology/

Part 7: Security

 * /Firewalls/ How firewalls work and how to configure them

Part 8: Beyond This Book

 * /Finding Additional Help/ search engines and user groups

title: Guide to Unix/Explanations


text:
US Internet Law/DMCA

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) (17 U.S.C. §§ 117, 512, 1201 et. seq.). Enacted in 1998, and codified as amendments to the Copyright Act, the DMCA addressed a number of computer-related issues:

Implements two 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties: The WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Notice and Take-Down Provisions (17 U.S.C. § 512): Provides a “safe harbor” to Internet service providers (“ISPs,” a broadly defined term that includes most website operators). ISPs are protected from claims of copyright infringement arising from the posting of copyrighted materials on websites if they reasonably implement and inform users of the ISP’s policy that provides for the identification and termination of infringing material.

(Note: The ISP must act to remove the infringing works or it may be liable for any resulting damages.)

Anti-hacking provisions (17 U.S.C. § 1201, et. seq.): Prohibits circumvention of technological measures that effectively control access to a copyrighted work as well as prohibits the manufacture, production, trafficking in or offering of any technology, product, service or device that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a copyrighted work.

Maintenance and repair provision (17 U.S.C. § 117): Expands Section 117 of the Copyright Act to authorize an owner of a copy of a computer program to make a copy of the program so long as the copy is made as an essential step in the utilization of the program or for purposes of maintenance or repair.

title: US Internet Law/DMCA


text:
US Internet Law/DMCA Anti-Circumvention

Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”) (17 U.S.C. §§ 117, 512, 1201 et. seq.). Enacted in 1998, and codified as amendments to the Copyright Act, the DMCA addressed a number of computer-related issues:

Implements two 1996 World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties: The WIPO Copyright Treaty and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty.

Anti-hacking provisions (17 U.S.C. § 1201, et. seq.): Prohibits circumvention of technological measures that effectively control access to a copyrighted work as well as prohibits the manufacture, production, trafficking in or offering of any technology, product, service or device that is primarily designed or produced for the purpose of circumventing a technological measure that effectively controls access to a copyrighted work.

Maintenance and repair provision (17 U.S.C. § 117): Expands Section 117 of the Copyright Act to authorize an owner of a copy of a computer program to make a copy of the program so long as the copy is made as an essential step in the utilization of the program or for purposes of maintenance or repair.

title: US Internet Law/DMCA Anti-Circumvention


text:
US Internet Law/Copyright

The Copyright Act of 1976 went into effect January 1, 1978. The act protects original works of authorship, including computer software programs, by investing the author with the exclusive right to copy, reproduce, modify, distribute, publicly display and publicly perform the copyrighted work, generally for a term of the life of the author plus seventy years.

The Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act extended the term from life plus 50 to life plus 70 years. The works made for hire term was extended from 75 to 95 years.

Types of work protected: The Copyright Act protects creative expression in works of authorship (which is defined broadly, with little “creativity” required), but it does not protect facts, ideas, discoveries, processes or methods.

The act also protects databases as creative compilations even though the underlying data may be facts (that are not protected).

Copyright interests are held by the individual author unless assigned. Copyrights in works created by employees within the scope of their employment are owned by the employer. Copyrights in works created under contract by an independent contractor are retained by the contractor unless an executed assignment or other document provides for a transfer.

Copyright interests attach automatically upon creation of a work of authorship. Copyright registration is optional, but is a prerequisite to commencing an infringement suit. Significant benefits and access to stronger remedies in an infringement suit result from early registration of a copyright.

Downloading music files, graphics or text from the Internet can constitute infringement because an electronic copy of the work is being made. According to some case law, even loading and running a program from disk can be infringement unless authorized by license, since a copy is being made from disk to random access memory.

Note: There are two legal concepts: Contributory Infringement - a person with knowledge of the infringing activity induces causes or materially contributes to the conduct of another to infringe.

Vicarious Liability - a person or entity has the right and ability to control the activities of the person directly infringing and receives financial benefit from those activities – even if the entity or person is unaware of the activity.

Civil remedies include: Injunctive relief, actual damages, an accounting of profits and in certain circumstances statutory damages of up to $150,000 per work, as well as impoundment and destruction of equipment and infringement material and paying attorney’s fees.

Criminal penalties are: Misdemeanor - up to one year’s imprisonment and fines up to $100,000. Felony - fines up to $250,000 and up to five years’ imprisonment for the first violation and up to 10 years for repeat offenders.

title: US Internet Law/Copyright


text:
US Internet Law/Clickwrap Agreements

Click-wrap/Shrink-wrap/Download Licenses

A shrink-wrap license is generally associated with “off the shelf” software in which the license agreement is contained within the software packaging materials. It is in a standard printed form, and is accepted by the customer when the customer carries out a specified task, such as opening the envelope or the shrink-wrapping containing the CD-ROM (breaking the seal while doing so) or by installing the software.

A variation is to accept the terms of the onscreen license presented during the setup process before the software is installed on the computer. If the license terms are not accepted, the software will not install. This is referred to as click-wrap. Frequently, the on-screen acceptance is in addition to the software being delivered in a shrink-wrap but as more and more software is preloaded, the click-wrap methodology performs an important function.

Increasingly, software can be downloaded from Internet websites. In such cases, it would be normal for a customer to be presented with an onscreen license agreement, which can either be accepted or rejected. If not accepted, the software will not download.

The license terms should be presented to the potential customer before the purchasing mechanics take place. This would ensure that they are effective.

A web-wrap license is considered an Internet contract that asks that user to accept the terms of the license by clicking a “yes” or “no” button before or after seeing the complete agreement. A “yes” gives the user complete access to the website. A “no” prevents the user from gaining access to all or some of the information on the site. This is also known as a click-wrap license.

title: US Internet Law/Clickwrap Agreements


text: User talk:194.66.229.8

title: User talk:194.66.229.8


text: User talk:68.170.160.219

title: User talk:68.170.160.219


text:
Talk:Singing/Caring for your voice

Someone please verify the "drink alcohol" phrase, because as near as I can figure, this only applies to heavy drinking in combination with smoking increasing chances of throat cancer. Also, I'm going to add "treat coughs" and "avoid dairy" as a nasal issue.

160.94.120.197 17:43, 19 October 2005 (UTC)lotusduck

title: Talk:Singing/Caring for your voice


text:
Talk:Circuit Theory/Bode Plots/Fast Bode Approximations

This page is pretty heavy in math notation, we should find a way to boil it down the the essentials. --Whiteknight T C E 17:48, 19 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Digital Circuits/7400 Series

This seems like a pretty valuable artical, but because it is focused on a single line of IC gates, it would probably be better suited as a wikipedia artical then as an entire wikibook. --Whiteknight T C E 18:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Digital Circuits/7400 Series


text: User talk:195.175.37.8

title: User talk:195.175.37.8


text:
Bookbinding/Paper knife

The correct term for this instrument is a 'bone folder'. It is traditionally fashioned from dense wood or cow-bone. Commonly it is a double-sided dull knife with one dull pointed pyramid-apex at one end.

title: Bookbinding/Paper knife