[OT] Silly Computer Users - Slackware

This is a discussion on [OT] Silly Computer Users - Slackware ; I was down at my favorite coffee shop this morning, and borrowed a friend's Window's computer to log into this box and check my mail using an app that's like telnet. (can't recall the name). There were some guys at ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 35

Thread: [OT] Silly Computer Users

  1. [OT] Silly Computer Users

    I was down at my favorite coffee shop this morning, and
    borrowed a friend's Window's computer to log into this box
    and check my mail using an app that's like telnet. (can't
    recall the name).

    There were some guys at an adjacent table "texting" on their
    cellphones, and when they saw me reading my mail in console
    mode they all started snickering.

    I asked them what was so funny and they pointed at my screen
    and broke out into gales of arrogant laughter and their
    verbal replies could be summed up as "What a primitive
    you are to be doing email without a lot of eye-candy
    or a mouse."

    But mutt on the computer I was using had a far more sophisticated
    display than than the text message screen on their cellphones, and is
    a far more sophisticated "texting" application than the one they
    were using. As is my console IM client and console IRC client.

    (Yes. technologically illiterate trolls who are going to replying to
    this even though I won't see those replies: modern cell phones
    are computers. They aren't "phones" at all.)

    Then there's the guy I know who sits in front of his computer
    all day long, watching videos.

    He's utterly contemptuous of people who sit in front of their
    TV's all day long and watch videos. I guess it's because they
    punch buttons on a remote control and he punches buttons with
    a mouse...

    Which reminds me: I had a visitor a while back, who brought
    his laptop with him and connected to my neighbor's unprotected
    wireless network and was browsing the Web.

    He runs KDE and honestly thought that I was a silly primitive
    because I brought up Firefox, which is just as sophisticated as
    the browser that comes with KDE, by entering "ff" on a screen
    with nothing but a shell prompt on it, instead of clicking
    on a cutesy icon with a mouse.

    I guess I have to applaud the advertising department at
    KDE. They have managed to convince a lot of people that
    their collection of apps with a common graphical theme
    is something other than a collection of apps with a
    common graphical theme.

    Must be the same people who convinced those guys that
    console mode email is sophisticated if it's on a handheld
    computer instead of a laptop, and that a couch potato
    sitting in front of a computer is superior to a couch
    potato sitting in front of a TV.

    Tom

    Email me here, the other address is just a spamtrap:
    calhobbit AT
    gmail DOT
    com


  2. Re: Silly Computer Users

    Ummm...., you don't have to click on any icons in kde to launch
    firefox. Just press F2, type in firefox (or whatever alias you
    created) and press enter.

  3. Re: Silly Computer Users

    On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:44:59 -0800 (PST), Jack wrote:

    >Ummm...., you don't have to click on any icons in kde to launch
    >firefox. Just press F2, type in firefox (or whatever alias you
    >created) and press enter.


    OMG! F2 key replaces Tom Neuter's ODE )

    Grant.
    --
    http://bugsplatter.mine.nu/

  4. Re: Silly Computer Users

    It's actually Alt-F2, just in case Tom wants to try this feature out.

  5. Re: Silly Computer Users


    Jack wrote :

    > Ummm...., you don't have to click on any icons in kde to launch
    > firefox. Just press F2, type in firefox (or whatever alias you
    > created) and press enter.


    Start the "Menu Editor" from the "Settings" sub-menu. Browse your way to
    the Firefox entry and check the section named "Current shortcut key",
    here there's a key-icon with the text "None".

    Click the key-icon and choose something like ++ and
    save. Now you can start Firefox using this key combination.
    --
    Thomas O.

    This area is designed to become quite warm during normal operation.

  6. KDE/ODE (was: Re: Silly Computer Users)

    On Jan 30, 8:59 am, Thomas Overgaard wrote:
    > [some idiot troll whose posts I killfile] wrote :
    >
    > > Ummm...., you don't have to click on any icons in kde to launch
    > > firefox. Just press F2, type in firefox (or whatever alias you
    > > created) and press enter.

    >
    > Start the "Menu Editor" from the "Settings" sub-menu. Browse your way to
    > the Firefox entry and check the section named "Current shortcut key",
    > here there's a key-icon with the text "None".
    >
    > Click the key-icon and choose something like ++ and
    > save. Now you can start Firefox using this key combination.


    That's typical of artificial user interfaces like KDE: Make a simple
    operation that's been a part of Linux since the beginning, standard
    throughout all distros, in the absence of even X, an arcane affair
    that works only with the artificial user interface in question.

    And make it require many times the system resources than
    the normal way.

    On almost any Linux box in the world, you can just enter:

    alias ff='firefox &'

    and the deed is done. Whatever alias you want, whatever
    app you want. The '&' puts the firefox command in the background,
    freeing up the prompt.

    For those of us who use the shell (ODE, the Other Desktop
    Environment),
    we generally have a file called /etc/aliases, which is sourced in the
    shell's main configuration file, /etc/profile in Slackware, with this
    line:

    source /etc/aliases

    That keeps the system-wide aliases in one place and makes it very
    easy to edit.

    The alias command lists them, if your memory fails you.

    alias al='alias' # makes it easy, eh?

    To see if an alias is already in use, for an alias or function or
    executable, do:

    type ff # for example.

    (the above is for bash/sh , the most common shells these days in
    the linxu/unix world -- simple variations will work with the other
    shells, which can be determined with a glance at their man pages)

    Why the hell tie yourself to an artificial user interface that's an
    incredible system-resource hog and takes as long to learn
    as the shell (starting from scratch) and is only found on a
    fraction of the linux/unix boxes in the world?

    An artificial interface that is MUCH more limited than the shell.

    Tom

    Email me here. Other address is spamtrap:
    calhobbit AT
    gmail
    DOT com















  7. Re: KDE/ODE (was: Re: Silly Computer Users)

    On 2008-01-30, Tom N wrote:
    >
    > On almost any Linux box in the world, you can just enter:
    >
    > alias ff='firefox &'
    >
    > and the deed is done.


    Don't you think it's a waste of resources to use an alias when you could
    just type

    fir[TAB]&[Enter]

    and accomplish the same thing? Damn, your ODE is such a resource hog!

    > For those of us who use the shell (ODE, the Other Desktop
    > Environment),
    > we generally have a file called /etc/aliases, which is sourced in the
    > shell's main configuration file, /etc/profile in Slackware, with this
    > line:
    >
    > source /etc/aliases


    Only an utter idiot would source /etc/aliases, since it's the *sendmail*
    alias list (or postfix, possibly exim?). For those of you who are not
    as stupid as Tom, system aliases can be put directly in /etc/profile, or
    in /etc/bashrc if you like to use that file, or in a shell script in
    /etc/profile.d/ . Only aliases that should be system-wide should be
    placed here; personal aliases should go into ~/.bash_profile, ~/.bashrc,
    or (deprecated) ~/.profile. And, of course, you can source your own
    ~/.aliases file from any or all of these files.

    I hope the above paragraph is warning to people searching the archives
    to ignore ''Tom's'' advice, which when not intentionally misleading is
    actually incorrect.

    > alias al='alias' # makes it easy, eh?


    This is an even more egregious waste of resources! You are truly
    abusing your system resources now. What if you only have 640k of
    memory, which after all ought to be enough for anybody?

    > Why the hell tie yourself to an artificial user interface


    Aren't custom aliases an artificial user interface?

    > that's an
    > incredible system-resource hog and takes as long to learn
    > as the shell (starting from scratch) and is only found on a
    > fraction of the linux/unix boxes in the world?


    What fraction, 9/10? Even if you'd said "only used", the fraction is
    still higher than the fraction who use ''ODE'' or something less sucky
    like blackbox, fluxbox, fvwm, twm, ash, or even csh.

    --keith

    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


  8. Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O)

    On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:14:47 -0800, Tom N wrote:

    >...
    > On almost any Linux box in the world, you can just enter:
    >
    > alias ff='firefox &'
    >
    > and the deed is done. Whatever alias you want, whatever app you want.


    What's this idea to mix-up lyrics from ACDC and StatusQuo in the same
    old b0rken song?-)

    > The '&' puts the firefox command in the background, freeing up the
    > prompt.

    ....
    > An artificial interface that is MUCH more limited than the shell.


    I just can't wait the day you'll discover that alias are deprecated
    and will start stormtrooping the linux groups with news about the new
    mantras you're bringing out to them, Lucy on the half shell!

  9. Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O)

    On Jan 30, 11:36 am, loki harfagr wrote:
    > On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:14:47 -0800, Tom N wrote:
    > >...
    > > On almost any Linux box in the world, you can just enter:

    >
    > > alias ff='firefox &'

    >
    > > and the deed is done. Whatever alias you want, whatever app you want.

    >
    > What's this idea to mix-up lyrics from ACDC and StatusQuo in the same
    > old b0rken song?-)


    I have no idea what you are talking about there.

    Except that I know bull**** when I see it.

    >
    >
    >
    > > The '&' puts the firefox command in the background, freeing up the
    > > prompt.

    > ...
    > > An artificial interface that is MUCH more limited than the shell.

    >
    > I just can't wait the day you'll discover that alias are deprecated
    > and will start stormtrooping the linux groups with news about the new
    > mantras you're bringing out to them, Lucy on the half shell!


    This lack of intelligent content is sure typical of people who don't
    want the artificial and illusory supremacy of KDE questioned, even
    though it is nothing but a collection of applications with a common
    graphical theme.

    Check out the most recent man bash. Aliases are far from being
    deprecated. Why would such a useful feature ever be deprecated?

    The problem with becoming hooked on KDE (etc.) is that not only
    are you dependent on the corporate-sponsored geeks at KDE (etc.),
    but you are also dependent on those who understand the shell.

    Because you just can't run linux/unix effectively without
    understanding
    the basics of the shell.

    Those are the sort of dependencies promoted by technocrats who
    WANT the ordinary user to be dependent on them.

    That's the nature of the corporate agenda: Promoting dependence
    on them.

    A little shell knowhow and a decent window manager and you
    can be free and create an ODE that suits _you_, not some
    yuppy geeks whose corporate masters think that turning the
    Internet into a virtual shopping mall and your computer into
    an updated Boob Tube are admirable goals.


    Tom
    Use this email address. The other one is a spamtrap:
    calhobbit AT
    gmail DOT
    com



  10. Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O)

    On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:53:20 -0800, Tom N wrote:

    > an updated Boob Tube are admirable goals


    SUBSCRIBE

  11. Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O)

    Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:53:20 -0800, Tom N did catÂ*:

    > On Jan 30, 11:36 am, loki harfagr wrote:
    >> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:14:47 -0800, Tom N wrote:
    >> >...
    >> > On almost any Linux box in the world, you can just enter:

    >>
    >> > alias ff='firefox &'

    >>
    >> > and the deed is done. Whatever alias you want, whatever app you want.

    >>
    >> What's this idea to mix-up lyrics from ACDC and StatusQuo in the same
    >> old b0rken song?-)

    >
    > I have no idea what you are talking about there.


    Curious, that wass easy though:
    ACDC: "Dirty deeds done dirt cheap" - 1976
    Status Quo: "Whatever you want" - 1979

    >
    > Except that I know bull**** when I see it.


    Highly doubtful as until then it seems you don't
    even know bull**** when you write it.

  12. ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    On 2008-01-31, Loki Harfagr wrote:
    > Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:53:20 -0800, Tom N did cat*:
    >
    >> On Jan 30, 11:36 am, loki harfagr wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:14:47 -0800, Tom N wrote:
    >>> >...
    >>> > On almost any Linux box in the world, you can just enter:
    >>>
    >>> > alias ff='firefox &'
    >>>
    >>> > and the deed is done. Whatever alias you want, whatever app you want.
    >>>
    >>> What's this idea to mix-up lyrics from ACDC and StatusQuo in the same
    >>> old b0rken song?-)

    >>
    >> I have no idea what you are talking about there.

    >
    > Curious, that wass easy though:
    > ACDC: "Dirty deeds done dirt cheap" - 1976
    > Status Quo: "Whatever you want" - 1979


    My tastes in music are different than yours.

    >> Except that I know bull**** when I see it.

    >
    > Highly doubtful as until then it seems you don't
    > even know bull**** when you write it.



    Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them with a ten
    foot pole.

    As well as many people who use other linux distros. And unix distros.

    Yet we do run X and window managers and can do anything that can
    be done with KDE, with a fraction of the system resources KDE
    requires. We can do MORE.

    Since that's all I've been saying, and it isn't bull**** at
    all...

    ODE (the Other Desktop Environment) is simply running Linux from
    the command line, in the console or the X environments.

    You ought to try it.



    Tom


  13. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:37:54 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:

    > Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them with
    > a ten foot pole.


    Of course you know why people use KDE? It is because of the fluoride the
    government puts in the water. It is all a massive conspiracy to convert
    everyone to KDEism. I'm sure glad you can see this for what it is Tom. We
    need more people with your sort of vision.

    Richard James

  14. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    On 2008-01-31, Richard James wrote:
    > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:37:54 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:
    >
    >> Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them with
    >> a ten foot pole.

    >
    > Of course you know why people use KDE? It is because of the fluoride the
    > government puts in the water. It is all a massive conspiracy to convert
    > everyone to KDEism. I'm sure glad you can see this for what it is Tom. We
    > need more people with your sort of vision.


    Be nice if one of you would find the courage to engage me in an honest debate.
    But I fully understand why you don't want to do that.

    People use KDE for a variety of reasons. The main one being that it is a clone
    of the Windows user-interface, so they already know basically how to use it.

    And they've been told, in various ways, that running Linux from the commandline
    is impossibly difficult, by people who, for their own reasons, don't want the
    newbies to learn to use the shell.

    I think it is because they want the newbies to be dependent on them.

    You can't master linux without mastering the shell. KDE is not the complete
    user-interface it pretends to be.

    It's really nothing but a collection of applications with a common graphical
    interface that can be run mostly with a mouse.

    As if pointing-and-clicking was more sophisticated than using the keyboard.

    It's actually the other way around, of course. Any monkey can point at something
    it recognizes. Try teaching one to type...

    Have a banana, Richard.

    :-)

    Tom






  15. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:52:13 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:

    > On 2008-01-31, Richard James wrote:
    >> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:37:54 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:
    >>
    >>> Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them
    >>> with a ten foot pole.

    >>
    >> Of course you know why people use KDE? It is because of the fluoride
    >> the government puts in the water. It is all a massive conspiracy to
    >> convert everyone to KDEism. I'm sure glad you can see this for what it
    >> is Tom. We need more people with your sort of vision.

    >
    > Be nice if one of you would find the courage to engage me in an honest
    > debate. But I fully understand why you don't want to do that.


    Ok I'll make this clear once and for all. You are a Troll. That is you
    don't want to have a normal conversation you want to have a warped
    conversation. Normally I like to have conversations with normal human
    adults or even children but you want to act like a moron. I don't want to
    talk to a moron so we are not going to ever have that conversation.

    I did treat you ok at first but since you started Trolling I have had to
    treat you differently.

    Tom frankly you are a waste of time, the only reason I'm talking to you
    know is because I want to waste time, by tomorrow your new name shifting
    identity will be back in my kill-file and I won't have to listen to your
    crap again.

    BTW you are a really crap Troll too!

    Richard James

  16. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    On 2008-01-31, Richard James wrote:
    > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:52:13 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-01-31, Richard James wrote:
    >>> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:37:54 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them
    >>>> with a ten foot pole.
    >>>
    >>> Of course you know why people use KDE? It is because of the fluoride
    >>> the government puts in the water. It is all a massive conspiracy to
    >>> convert everyone to KDEism. I'm sure glad you can see this for what it
    >>> is Tom. We need more people with your sort of vision.

    >>
    >> Be nice if one of you would find the courage to engage me in an honest
    >> debate. But I fully understand why you don't want to do that.

    >
    > Ok I'll make this clear once and for all. You are a Troll.


    But I'm not. And you know it.

    You just don't want to engage in an honest debate about the relative
    merits of KDE and the shell as user interfaces in the X environment.

    And you don't want anyone else discussing the subject or posting about
    it.

    Which is very, very strange, considering how many Slackers don't use
    KDE (or anything like it).

    Stand by for some very interesting and substantial posts on the subject
    of ODE (the Other Desktop Environment).

    I'm sure you'll hate them, too. If the stress gets to be too much, you
    can always see a doctor about some medication.

    What you can't do is bully me. Not if your life depended on it. I wonder
    how long it's going to take you and your buddies to figure that out.
    You are _supposed_ to be intelligent and educated men.

    Tom






  17. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    **** off **** snap nobody cares what you think

    tick..tick..tick..

    On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Tom Newton wrote:

    [trolling crud removed]

    --
    Cheers
    Res

    mysql> update auth set Framed-IP-Address='127.0.0.127' where user= 'troll';

  18. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    Tom Newton wrote:

    > Which is very, very strange, considering how many Slackers don't use
    > KDE (or anything like it).


    Could you quantify "how many Slackers don't use KDE", 40% of Slackware®
    users, 50%, 60%, and cite the data that supports your contention
    please? I'm not disputing your contention, I'd just like to know what
    the figures are, and how you arrived at them.
    --
    Two Ravens
    "...hit the squirrel..."

  19. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    (I'll start by apologizing for the length. You'll find no Tom-bashing in
    this post. Forewarned is forearmed!)

    Tom Newton wrote in
    news:fns5oc$vu1$1@registered.motzarella.org:

    > On 2008-01-31, Richard James wrote:
    >> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:37:54 +0000, Tom Newton wrote:
    >>
    >>> Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them
    >>> with a ten foot pole.

    >>

    [snip]
    >
    > Be nice if one of you would find the courage to engage me in an honest
    > debate. But I fully understand why you don't want to do that.


    There's nothing to "debate". Trimming inittab so that only one console
    is run requires less resources than running the default 6. Runlevel 1
    takes even less. Runlevel 4 takes more. Gnome and KDE use more
    resources than an X background and a single xterm. That is also true of
    most, if not all, window managers.

    So what? The resources are there so that people can tweak their
    computing experience as much as they want to. Slackers tend to tweak
    more than some, less than others, but the great majority of people aren't
    "computer people" and would be just as happy with a performant system
    that booted from CD and stored data (email, pictures) to a non-booting
    hard drive or flash drive.

    Most people want a computer to be as simple to use as a toaster. They
    don't care what resources are used, how many are left, and whether or not
    every computing cycle is wrung for maximum efficient usage. And since
    efficient means using resources effectively for what _I_want_to_achieve_
    there isn't a single definition of "efficient".

    > People use KDE for a variety of reasons.


    Yes, they do. No debate there.

    > The main one being that it is
    > a clone of the Windows user-interface, so they already know basically
    > how to use it.


    Possible debate material since you start with the (possibly invalid)
    assumption that KDE users started as Microsoft Windows users, or that
    they have used it and wish it emulated on everything that they use.
    That's an easy premise and might even be accurate. Then again...

    > And they've been told, in various ways, that running Linux from the
    > commandline is impossibly difficult, by people who, for their own
    > reasons, don't want the newbies to learn to use the shell.


    Here you're beginning to stray since you're deciding what they've been
    told and what conclusions they've drawn from that. Then you're
    attributing motive to their sources of information. Dangerously
    unsupportable ground you're on, methinks.

    > I think it is because they want the newbies to be dependent on them.


    Maybe they realize that most want their computing experience to be as
    easy as a toaster?

    > You can't master linux without mastering the shell.


    Almost certainly true. We do, in fact, agree here. Don't forget,
    though, that there's more than one shell.

    > KDE is not the complete user-interface it pretends to be.


    If it pretended to be a "complete" user interface then would it have
    xterm/rxvt/Alt-F2? We differ here. My belief is that they KDE guys want
    to work on KDE. I believe that they find it interesting. I believe that
    they believe that they're making a Windows-alternative OS a more-viable
    option to those who want the ease of use of a toaster from their
    computer.

    > It's really nothing but a collection of applications with a common
    > graphical interface that can be run mostly with a mouse.


    No debate, that's certainly true in my opinion.

    > As if pointing-and-clicking was more sophisticated than using the
    > keyboard.


    I believe not more sophisticated, but more toaster-like.

    > It's actually the other way around, of course. Any monkey can point at
    > something it recognizes. Try teaching one to type...


    Read up. Some use simple keyboards with word-equivalent (rather than
    letter-equivalent) keys to "communicate" with their human
    handlers/trainers/researchers. Of course, the complexity of their
    communications _is_ under debate.

    > Have a banana, Richard.


    Given your history this is most likely to be interpreted as mean-
    spirited. I believe that it is a deliberate attempt to 'goad' Richard
    into making a response. Perhaps it will work. Perhaps not.

    >:-)


    Almost certainly _not_ true.

    > Tom


    Yet Another Tom Nym-shift. If your general posting style becomes less
    combative then you'll stay out of my scorefile (about which you probably
    don't care; good for you!). You see, I have a limited amount of time
    left alive (as do we all) and I try to be careful to expend it in ways
    that satisfy my drives (human, not hard). Combative discourse I find
    unsatisfying. Reading combative discourse I find unsatisfying. People
    who primarily engage in combative discourse generally find their way into
    my scorefile (for nym-shifters) or killfile.

    As an aside, I've kept some form of 'james' and 'mentor@arisia.*' for
    quite some time. I only changed to .invalid recently when I learned of
    the use of .invalid. My hope is that I speak nicely enough and
    intelligently enough to stay out of a majority of killfiles. If not, I
    try to make it easy for people to ignore me. By remaining unfiltered I
    can engage in meaningful discourse with the greatest number of posters in
    the groups I tend to frequent.

    I find it a rewarding experience. I would not hesitate to recommend the
    general practice to others.

    --
    The email address, above, is most certainly munged. Perhaps you
    might reply to the newsgroup, instead? Thanks!

  20. Re: ODE and KDE (was: Re: OKDEE/DODEE (was: Re: Silly K/O))

    On 2008-01-31, Tom Newton wrote:
    ^^^^^^^^^^

    Did you know nymshifting is evidence of being a troll?

    > Many Slackers don't use KDE or Gnome (etc.) and wouldn't touch them with a ten
    > foot pole.


    Do you have any evidence for this claim, or are you again just trolling?
    I'm guessing the latter.

    --keith


    --
    kkeller-usenet@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
    (try just my userid to email me)
    AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
    see X- headers for PGP signature information


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast