Microsoft caused BP oil spill!
Tim Smith
Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
<http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
--
--Tim Smith
DFS
> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
>
> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
I'm sure MS would like to know about this.
Forwarded to ste...@microsoft.com
Quantum Leaper
> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott
> Novell:
>
> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
>
death', they never said it was running Windows. Even slashdot wouldn't
say it was a Microsoft problem. Also BP was warned months before something
bad could happen and the didn't do anything.
Here what BP tech said "It would just turn blue, You'd have no data coming
through.", does that sound like a BSOD from Microsoft, which just about
EVERY one in the World who has used a computer would know what a BSOD from
Microsoft.
Tattoo Vampire
> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
>
> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
Yeah, that's a little much. First, they don't know for sure what OS the
system even ran. And even if it turns out to be Windows, it's not
Microsoft's fault if the rig's computer systems weren't properly maintained.
--
Regards,
[tv]
Owner/proprietor, Trollus Amongus, LLC
...Behind every great computer lies... a mess of wires!
Tattoo Vampire
> Stop sucking up to Roy,
He's not sucking up to him, he's attacking the blog post in question.
DFS
Here's what I got when I tried Metacity on Debian Etch:
http://www.angelfire.com/linux/dfs0/Debian_Metacity_slop.png
Maybe Debian caused the BP spill...
owl
> Tim Smith wrote:
> > Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott
> > Novell:
> >
> > <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
> >
> Stop sucking up to Roy, the BP said the techs called it 'blue screen of
> death', they never said it was running Windows.
Maybe it wasn't, but...
http://www.oilandgasonline.com/product.mvc/DrillWorksPREDICT-0001?VNETCOOKIE=NO
<quote>
DrillWorks/PREDICT is a popular software system for geopressure
analysis. The system is being used effectively around the world by
drilling engineers, geophysicists, geologists, and petrophysicists
within major oil industry companies to predict geopressures before,
during and after drilling.
...
DrillWorks software operates on Windows 95/98/NT4.0.
</quote>
http://www.onwindows.com/Partners/Halliburton/924/Default.aspx
<quote>
The GeoGraphix suite of software is a global leader in petroleum
exploration and development software designed specifically for the
Windows desktop environment.
</quote>
Zoolook
> Here's what I got when I tried Metacity on Debian Etch:
>
> http://www.angelfire.com/linux/dfs0/Debian_Metacity_slop.png
>
> Maybe Debian caused the BP spill...
Linux does NOT crash... it just goes on a user sabbatical!
--
How quickly daft jumping zebras vex.
JeffM
>they don't know for sure what OS the system even ran.
>
http://www.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1730284&cid=33005840&mode=nested&threshold=2#33005840
>And even if it turns out to be Windows, it's not Microsoft's fault
>
Read Fookin's comment about repeated reinstalls.
>if the rig's computer systems weren't properly maintained.
>
Fookin's comment goes into *updating* too.
BP screwed the pooch every way they possibly could have.
That corporation deserves the death penalty.
High Plains Thumper
> Tim Smith wrote:
>
>> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott
>> Novell:
>>
>> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
>
> Yeah, that's a little much. First, they don't know for sure what OS
> the system even ran. And even if it turns out to be Windows, it's
> not Microsoft's fault if the rig's computer systems weren't properly
> maintained.
I see Timmy Troll continues to bash Roy as though he wrote the article,
but not to worry, it is found elsewhere like here:
[quote]
Tech worker testifies of 'blue screen of death' on oil rig's computer
Crucial drilling monitoring and control system crippled by crashes, says
rig's chief electronics technician
By Gregg Keizer
July 23, 2010 04:10 PM ET
Computerworld - A computer that monitored drilling operations on the
Deepwater Horizon had been freezing with a "blue screen of death" prior
to the explosion that sank the oil rig last April, the chief electronics
technician aboard testified Friday at a federal hearing.
"Blue screen of death," or BSOD, is a term most often used to describe
the display shown by Microsoft Windows after a serious crash that has
incapacitated a PC.
In his testimony Friday, Michael Williams, the chief electronics
technician aboard the Transocean-owned Deepwater Horizon, said that the
rig's safety alarm had been habitually switched to a bypass mode to
avoid waking up the crew with middle-of-the-night warnings.
[...]
Williams survived the explosion and resulting fire on the rig by leaping
into the water. While he did not identify the operating system running
the balky computer, the phrase "blue screen of death" is typically used
to describe a Windows crash.
Microsoft declined to comment on Williams' testimony and
characterization of the crash screen. Transocean did not respond to
e-mail seeking comment.
[/quote]
It is just another reason why a Microsoft Windows operating system
should not be used for mission critical (in this case life safety)
applications.
--
HPT
7
This is the kind of gradual system wide creeping death that eventually
overcomes all safety systems that employs micoshaft products
and components.
The same kind of system wide creeping death in a different disguise
that took out the London Stock Exchange and which resulted in
switch over to Linux.
Micoshaft makes creeping death products (TM).
Micoshaft made the creeping death products that took out BP's oil rig
causing biggest man made disaster, and made the creeping death
products that took out London Stock Exchange
causing billions of dollars worth of trades to be lost.
Chris Ahlstrom
--
You have literary talent that you should take pains to develop.
Hadron
So you're another clueless moron who knows nothing about the accident
and how it happened?
voodoo
> JeffM <jef...@email.com> writes:
>
>> BP screwed the pooch every way they possibly could have. That
>> corporation deserves the death penalty.
>
> So you're another clueless moron who knows nothing about the accident
> and how it happened?
are you going to tell us about the accident and how it happened?
7
Well if he doesn't, then can I impose?
Ok, here we go...
A Long long time ago,
In a far far away galactic place near Texas,
1. Some windummy smokin a rubber shoe because his spliff money
had been forked out to buy a micoshaft license to appease
the BSA gods, recommended that some cheap skate micky mouse
creeping death software sold by a crcoporation calling
itself micoshaft be installed in some safety critical system
destined for an oil platform.
2. There were many false prophets who claimed that
creeping death software is a feature and not a bug.
Most of these false prophets have since gone into hiding
or stand behind lawyers including micoshaft and its marketing
directors that claims otherwise.
3. Then in one world shattering disaster day, creeping death software
worked the unthinkable feat of forcing its human operators
to switch off a critical feature by theatening to waken
everyone unless the computer was switched off. This is
a critical feature of creeping death software.
System wide death creeps up on you inch by inch until
its too late for you to know what hit you.
4. Boom! And then it happened. The end for all those
conned and sold into working their life away behind
safety critical systems that don't work because they
were employed to work with systems that had creeping
death eating away at the core.
5. And now we discuss the features of creeping death
software and how it causes disasters and cons big
corporations to loose big amounts of money.
JeffM
>>knows nothing about the accident and how it happened?
>>
are giving first-hand accounts in their testimony before Congress.
Don't count on corporate media (Faux Noose) to cover that well
--if at all.
So far, the damage due to BP's concentration on profit
at the expense of safety and the environment
and in defiance of numerous laws is:
11 human lives
Massive poisoning of the 9th-largest marine ecosystem
When the full impact of the goo striking the coastline comes,
it will become obvious to all that 40% of the USA's wetlands
are along the Gulf Coast.
Most estimates say that what British Petroleum was spewing
was the equivalent of between 2 and 3 Exxon Valdez events
EACH DAY.
With BP having immediately hired all 12 of the submersibles
capable of filming what was happening,
it should be obvious to all that the only images you got to see
were the ones BP *wanted* you to see.
One oil man who has been correct in his assessment
of events many times before has said that the recent
"capping of the pipe" is a sideshow and that a month from now
folks will notice that the spew hasn't attenuated, but grown.
http://google.com/search?q=%22+8-miles%22+%22+Matt.Simmons%22
>>are you going to tell us about the accident and how it happened?
>>
7 wrote:
>Well if he doesn't, then can I impose?
>
>[...]Some windummy smokin a rubber shoe
>because his spliff money had been forked out
>to buy a micoshaft license to appease the BSA gods[...]
>
You would think that a high-profile failure
of M$'s junk in a mission-critical role would suffice
and others would know not to follow suit.
If a warship dead in the water isn't enough of an example,
you have to wonder what exactly would be.
http://google.com/search?q=cache:Tkdu2nY9BJwJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_(CG-48)+*-crew-member-entered-a-zero-*-*-*-*+inc+inc+*-*-*-*-towed-back+all-*-machines+*-brought-down+inc+on-*-network+inc+causing.the.ship's.propulsion.system.to.fail+inc+inc+inc+several.times+*-*-dead-in-*-water#Smart_ship_testbed
http://tinyurl.com/USS-Yorktown-DIW
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Yorktown_(CG-48)#Smart_ship_testbed
http://google.com/search?q=cache:gXE_0G6PSo8J:www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1998/07/13987+Smart-*+Microsoft.certified.professional+rights+crashing-the-*-network+dead.in.the.water+Technically-*-*-NT-*-*-is-no-match-for-*-Unix-*-*+reserved+*-buffer-overrun-occurred+USS.Yorktown+For-*-two-*-a-half-hours
http://tinyurl.com/USS-Yorktown-DIW-2
http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/1998/07/13987
Chris Ahlstrom
>>Hadron wrote:
>
>>> knows nothing about the accident and how it happened?
>
> <long description of accident snipped>
"Hadron" is shilling for BP now?
--
Q: What's tiny and yellow and very, very, dangerous?
A: A canary with the super-user password.
7
I concur - the pressure readings are 'inconclusive' which 100% means
the stuff is seeping out and will eventually break out
in hundreds of different places.
So they have one month if that to concrete it.
But that probably may not be the answer because the thing about
pressure is that it will continue to build until every nook and
cranny is 100% tested. An if any microscopic point fails, then you got
gushing oil, gas and debris which is going to make that tiny microscopic
hole bigger and bigger until it all comes out. I think they need to get
to the other end of the pipe and start sealing from the source back
in many stages.
High Plains Thumper
> High Plains Thumper wrote:
>
>> [quote] [...]
>>
>> Computerworld - A computer that monitored drilling operations on
>> the Deepwater Horizon had been freezing with a "blue screen of
>> death" prior to the explosion that sank the oil rig last April, the
>> chief electronics technician aboard testified Friday at a federal
>> hearing.
>>
>> "Blue screen of death," or BSOD, is a term most often used to
>> describe the display shown by Microsoft Windows after a serious
>> crash that has incapacitated a PC.
>>
>> In his testimony Friday, Michael Williams, the chief electronics
>> technician aboard the Transocean-owned Deepwater Horizon, said that
>> the rig's safety alarm had been habitually switched to a bypass
>> mode to avoid waking up the crew with middle-of-the-night
>>
>> or http://tinyurl.com/244tvue
>
> This is the kind of gradual system wide creeping death that
> eventually overcomes all safety systems that employs micoshaft
> products and components.
>
> The same kind of system wide creeping death in a different disguise
> that took out the London Stock Exchange and which resulted in switch
> over to Linux.
>
> Micoshaft makes creeping death products (TM).
>
> Micoshaft made the creeping death products that took out BP's oil
> rig causing biggest man made disaster, and made the creeping death
> products that took out London Stock Exchange causing billions of
> dollars worth of trades to be lost.
Article continued to say:
[quote]
In his testimony Friday, Michael Williams, the chief electronics
technician aboard the Transocean-owned Deepwater Horizon, said that the
rig's safety alarm had been habitually switched to a bypass mode to
avoid waking up the crew with middle-of-the-night warnings.
Williams said that a computer control system in the drill shack would
still record high gas levels or a fire, but it would not trigger warning
sirens, according to numerous reports, including stories published by
the New York Times and New Orleans' largest daily, the Times-Picayune.
[/quote]
Yes, per the news articles, it is interesting how the computer monitored
(flammable) gas levels. For one, we don't know what life safety systems
the drilling rig had on board. A BSOD computer screen is of course
certainly not a confidence builder.
What I am sort of gathering is that there were a good number of safety
compliance issues outstanding already on board, which helped to decrease
integrity and reliability, leading to the inevitable and sad disasterous
results.
Let's say if the news articles have a thread of truth, then the sole
dependence on this drilling computer alone was IMHO, a mistake by the
owner / user of the drilling rig. There should have been a secondary
backup system that handled the mission critical life safety systems on
board, which was not depended upon a desktop computer with a Windows
operating system. AFAIK, Microsoft has yet to establish a mission
critical reliable operating system computer.
OTOH, there are Linux systems out there that are hardened and rated for
mission critical systems.
If you will notice, fire alarm companies have rated panels with
microprocessor based main panels and subpanels, that handle the ins and
outs of the fire detection components, with redundancy built in for
reliability. A desktop computer may be used as a graphic window into
the system, to give the building (or ship) owner a user friendly way to
status the system and for trouble shooting. However, the desktop does
not operate the system.
My guess is that they had the flammable gas and fire detection systems
alarms disabled because the systems were possibly defective needing
repair, etc. that led to the lack of warning so crew could take evasive
measures to mitigate prior to it leading into a disaster. There may
have also been a lack of training among the operators, to understand
panel operation and messages so they did not have to depend on the
alleged Windows based computer graphics.
As time goes on, the issue will be resolved in the courts, unfortunately.
--
HPT
Ian Hilliard
Hash: SHA1
On 23/07/10 22:01, Tim Smith wrote:
> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
>
> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
>
>
Microsoft is guilty of creating an environment, where unstable software
is considered acceptable.
Ian
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iEYEARECAAYFAkxMFDsACgkQ0DzqJNlXtD4kNgCfQ+THIiYL9R0kCmrELZYf8bsG
iIQAoI+jw2CF4uQIGrcIpoFvoyydtfeR
=wPXc
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Hadron
> On 23/07/10 22:01, Tim Smith wrote:
>> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
>>
>> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
>>
>>
>
> Microsoft is guilty of creating an environment, where unstable software
> is considered acceptable.
>
> Ian
XP was a good workhorse for me. And I developed on it for years. What
was so unstable? Most of the worlds businesses use it or Windows 7 for
mission critical work. You seem to make things up as you go along.
My debian system is pretty damn stable but it does screw up as do MANY
OSS apps I use on it - including my stalwart emacs-
Chris Ahlstrom
> Ian Hilliard <nos...@hilliardtech.com> writes:
>
>> On 23/07/10 22:01, Tim Smith wrote:
>>> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
>>>
>>> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
>>
>> Microsoft is guilty of creating an environment, where unstable software
>> is considered acceptable.
>
> XP was a good workhorse for me. And I developed on it for years. What
> was so unstable? Most of the worlds businesses use it or Windows 7 for
> mission critical work. You seem to make things up as you go along.
"Hadron" rewriting history? Say it ain't so!
Windows has gotten better, but it is also a watchword for "bad quality" and
"problems". Hell, it even appeared in a South Park video, crashing.
"blue screen" has entered the lexicon of the Common Man, thanks to
Microsoft's legacy quality-control issues.
Win XP is better, but still has issues with networked resources.
And bloatware like Adobe Reader has frozen up XP on occasion.
Win 7 is even better, but *still* has issues with networked resources.
Tell me *one* place where they have a Win 7 computer in a mission-critical
system. The very idea is laughable until a service-pack or two has gone
under the bridge.
> My debian system is pretty damn stable but it does screw up as do MANY
> OSS apps I use on it - including my stalwart emacs-
I'm a bit surprised the emacs would screw up.
"Hadron" should try vi in its "vim" incarnation. Rock solid and fast.
Yesterday, bouml would consistently abort X Windows, while trying to parse
both CPP and H files. The workaround was to just parse the H files.
I had updated this server/workstation a few days ago, and grub-pc got
updated. It presented some pre-checked drives. There are 3 drives, two
SATA and one IDE. I went through the configuration, but decided not to
reboot just then.
Good thing, because when I got around to having time to reboot, today,
I got stuck in a non-functional grub-rescue mode. A quick google on the
other box, and a quick change of the Boot First drive to the SATA boot drive
got my back up. But the true fix was to run the reconfiguration of grub-pc
again, and select *all* drives. I think the motherboard would always boot
to the first drive in its list, the IDE, and that the Boot First option was
only a one-time option, not a permanent change to the BIOS, on this
motherboard (the one that boots up saying "Not for Production Use" :-)
--
Climbing onto a bar stool, a piece of string asked for a beer.
"Wait a minute. Aren't you a string?"
"Well, yes, I am."
"Sorry. We don't serve strings here."
The determined string left the bar and stopped a passer-by. "Excuse,
me," it said, "would you shred my ends and tie me up like a pretzel?" The
passer-by obliged, and the string re-entered the bar. "May I have a beer,
please?" it asked the bartender.
The barkeep set a beer in front of the string, then suddenly stopped.
"Hey, aren't you the string I just threw out of here?"
"No, I'm a frayed knot."
Homer
> A desktop computer may be used as a graphic window into the system,
> to give the building (or ship) owner a user friendly way to status
> the system and for trouble shooting. However, the desktop does not
> operate the system.
As someone with 25+ years experience in exactly this field, I can say
emphatically that this is not the case.
Sensors, valves, drilling equipment, hydrolic shut-offs, and alarm
systems are routed to patch panels in controller boxes. These boxes are
embedded systems with varying degrees of complexity, from purely
hardware-based simple logic arrays, to microprocessor systems running
bespoke controller software of only a few kilobytes in size. These are
certainly not desktop or even server-type systems, they're little more
than the equivalent of digital watches. They're specifically designed to
be as simple as possible, in order to minimise the possibility of
failure, and they include multiple layers of redundancy and failover. It
would require an extraordinary level of catastrophic and concurrent
system failure for the entire system to be rendered innefective,
assuming that failure was accidental, of course.
Years ago, monitoring these systems was accomplished using only panels
of blinking lights (literally), but can be (and now are) monitored using
any compatible device, including destop PCs running Windows or
GNU/Linux. But crucially, these systems can also be controlled and
manually overridden by that monitoring equipment, such that valves can
be manually opened, and alarms can be manually switched off. This is not
unique to PC-based monitoring equipment, but nonetheless poses the
interesting problem of what happens when such equipment becomes
compromised (e.g. by viruses, hackers or crashes).
So it seems that PC-based monitoring equipment on the drill-floor failed
due to some unspecified Windows system error (BSOD), and caused crucial
data to go unmonitored, specifically relating to the poorly refurbished
BOP. Whether that system, or any other on the rig, actually /caused/
failure, is currently unknown, although it is certainly possible.
Pedantically it could be argued that the system's failure to provide
crucial data is synonymous with causing the failure as a whole, however
there is IMHO the more important factor of an endemic failure of safety
practices among the crew, enforced by a management policy of cutting
corners and ignoring legally required procedures. The fact that
equipment failed should /not/ have meant that failure was ignored. The
fact that data was missing should /not/ have meant it was not acquired
by other means. Equipment fails ... that's a fact of life, but it's the
subsequent /response/ to that failure (or utter lack thereof) which was
wrong in this case.
No work of any kind may be undertaken on any offshore installation
without following the Permit To Work system, which requires the
authority of the OIM (or delegated to the department supervisor, then
signed-off by the OIM). And the OIM has a legal duty to audit all work
carried out on-board, so that nothing escapes the Permit To Work system.
IOW he is legally required to be aware (and approve) of everything
significant that happens on board.
But it seems the OIM was not only aware of this systemic failure of
safety procedures, he actually enforced this corner-cutting against the
protests of other senior members of staff. Malfunctions were ignored,
alarms were switched off, and vital pieces of equipment were poorly
maintained by cheap foreign labour, without any auditing of the results.
And according to the testimony given, such practices were a matter of
unwritten company policy at BP.
So put simply ... yes, Windows caused the disaster (probably), but BP
allowed this malfunctioning system (and others) to continue unchecked.
They could have simply replaced the broken equipment, and operated
within legally required safety procedures, but instead they delegated to
save a few cents, killing 11 men, and causing one of the biggest
ecological disasters in history.
May they burn in Hell.
--
K.
http://slated.org
Homer
> Hadron posted this message in ROT13 encoding:
>> XP was a good workhorse for me. And I developed on it for years.
>> What was so unstable?
[...]
> "Hadron" rewriting history? Say it ain't so!
Hadron blatantly denying XP was unstable?
Unbelievable!
--
K.
http://slated.org
DFS
> So put simply ... yes, Windows caused the disaster (probably),
"An engineering expert told investigators that the crew members had
incorrectly performed a critical test of emergency equipment and did not
detect a dangerous “kick” of gas roughly an hour before the explosion.
John R. Smith, a petroleum engineering professor at Louisiana State
University, told investigators that rig data showed crew members had
failed to correctly test the pressure in the well."
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/24/us/24hearings.html?_r=4&hp
> but BP
> allowed this malfunctioning system (and others) to continue unchecked.
> They could have simply replaced the broken equipment, and operated
> within legally required safety procedures, but instead they delegated to
> save a few cents, killing 11 men, and causing one of the biggest
> ecological disasters in history.
So is it BP or is it Windows that caused the explosion and spill? Make
up your mind.
> May they burn in Hell.
With you alongside them, of course, you having directly enabled an
offshore drilling firm to pollute the Nigerian ocean.
Hadron
> Verily I say unto thee, that High Plains Thumper spake thusly:
>
>> A desktop computer may be used as a graphic window into the system,
>> to give the building (or ship) owner a user friendly way to status
>> the system and for trouble shooting. However, the desktop does not
>> operate the system.
>
> As someone with 25+ years experience in exactly this field, I can say
> emphatically that this is not the case.
It is astonishing that even someone as dim as HPT could make this
claim. Clearly he's been brainwashed to think "real work" is only done
using obscure CLI commands manually typed into a terminal communicating
over an ssh link.
Meanwhile in the real world ...
Hadron
XP was not unstable.
Maybe you were too dim to upgrade it properly?
It is the OS of choice of the vast majority of desktops in the world. Or
was.
That said I am sure there were some obscure installations. SW fucks up.
chrisv
"Hadron" shills for his master at almost every opportunity.
--
"Now Vista is cleaning up its act and its pretty much game over for
Linux." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark, January 2008.
Mithrandir
Hash: SHA1
On 07/25/2010 03:38 AM, Ian Hilliard wrote:
> On 23/07/10 22:01, Tim Smith wrote:
>> Wow...Microsoft caused the BP oil spill. At least so says Boycott Novell:
>
>> <http://techrights.org/2010/07/23/blue-screen-of-death-and-bp/>
>
>
>
> Microsoft is guilty of creating an environment, where unstable software
> is considered acceptable.
>
> Ian
It's BP's fault for choosing Windows (if they did, though it seems
likely), and Microsoft's fault for having sh*tty software. 'Nuff said.
(I guess BP didn't want to act like they were French?
http://arstechnica.com/open-source/news/2009/03/french-police-saves-millions-of-euros-by-adopting-ubuntu.ars
)
- --
People should read more.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/User:MithrandirAgain
"All that is gold does not glitter,
not all those who wander are lost;
the old that is strong does not wither,
deep roots are not reached by the frost.
- From the ashes a fire shall be woken,
a light from the shadows shall spring;
renewed shall be blade that was broken,
the crownless again shall be king."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMT4i2AAoJEKo37V1xH7gTzZsH/iMQPy1bw0eAF+bQT470E1ta
N/4jDwfd5YGxoDMzdmE2cqYK/lTGXn7bt12EEH087b4xC1104yiSeQjSiTmpS4yK
mVpJi6GBIhKiO7DVIV2L7H1plH+VyMmTgkoSuyV7adnwSWEmaIxVldZmKpOrJd/N
7gzhDFycxbAYIM8E7OkNjYJVUayAEi0O7wnOtdEjYxzl8BJTnX9K4nMgZBT4503C
A6BdLBekdTOjAkOste9dwqdBMjvQdHJkmN8H5GYjO5+KdMOo34j0iUbjfRt6Uam3
XwrmcomHU+w+T1FSIxNixN/9Vjz+R0o4JfbxT4pIWFSE1eaxd6GEPpwJYJx4QCc=
=2cOJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----