Fix for “gpg-agent is not available” message

I have to save this because I forget about thisĀ every single time I build a new install, and can’t figure out why I keep getting “gpg-agent is not available in this session”.

The components come from different packages (gnupg2-2.1.7-1.fc22.x86_64 and gnupg-1.4.19-2.fc22.x86_64 in my case). The solution is to use the gpg2 command instead of gpg

Source: How to make gpg find gpg-agent – Unix & Linux Stack Exchange

Use @example.com email address for sites that require email

You know those annoying websites that are designed to briefly show you the page, but then block you from actually using it until you enter your email address? That annoys the crap out of me! There’s an easy way around it, though, if you don’t want to use your real email address: make an @example.com one!

There’s an explanation of example.com below, but basically it is a domain that seems like a real domain and accepts email from other mail servers, but immediately dumps the email. This allows people to test out programs they write that need to send email, but it also provides an interesting back door to websites requiring an email address.

All you need to do is come up with anything – anything at all, whether it’s names, words, just a bunch of random letters – and put it before the @example.com. As long as it’s a valid email format, example.com will accept it. So go ahead and use IROCK@example.com, or xxsddfswe@example.com or youcanthavemyemailaddress@example.com.

One caveat: this isn’t a secret, and there are quite a few coders out there that won’t allow any @example.com email addresses. This trick will work at most websites, but don’t be surprised if you get a “not a valid domain” message from time to time.

Happy surfing!

select a domain name without creating naming conflicts if end-users try to use the sample configurations or examples verbatim.

Source: example.com – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

House approves flag burning amendment

I’m late writing about the proposed flag-burning amendment. This is mostly because I cannot believe that an amendment was re-introduced. I thought that we had already dealt with this issue last decade! Burning the flag is a despicable act, but it is also constitutionally-protected free speech. Banning this act would be restricting our First Amendment rights. This amendment would destroy one of the ideals that the flag stands for in an effort to protect the flag. Which just doesn’t make sense.

Reason to vote for Bill Ritter for Colorado Governor

Well, it didn’t take long to to find a good reason to vote for Bill Ritter for Governor of Colorado in ’06: He has an extremely balanced and educated view of reproductive rights:

However, voters do have a right to know where I stand on this issue. I am pro-life as a matter of personal faith. If Roe v. Wade is overturned, and the decision of whether or not to legalize abortions reverts to the states, and if the Colorado Legislature passes a bill banning abortion, I will sign the bill only if it provides protections for women who are victims of rape or incest, or to protect the life of the mother. However, should the Colorado Legislature pass a complete ban without these protections, I would veto that bill. That said, Roe V. Wade is the law of the land and abortions are legal. As Governor I will act in the same way I did as DA. I will respect the law as it stands, and I will not act to undermine the right of a woman to choose to have an abortion. For example, as Denver DA, I prosecuted those who caused damage and created disruption at family services clinics.

I do believe that there is much to be done in our society, and in our state, to make abortions rare. In the area of teen pregnancy prevention, greater efforts can be made in educating our youth. We can examine the adoption policies of this state and look for ways to support girls and women who find themselves confronting an unplanned pregnancy.

Actually, Mr. Ritter provides a few answers in this interview with ColoradoPols that make me think that he’d be a good choice for governor. Definitely give this interview a read.

Pentagon is criticized over Iraq billing

Well, I’ll be damned. It looks like someone has finally realized that there might be something fishy about Halliburton’s no-bid contract in Iraq.

Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. Congress berated the Pentagon for withholding information about Halliburton’s disputed billing under a $2.5 billion contract for Iraqi oil site repairs and fuel imports.

Saying the Pentagon is acting as if ‘it has something to hide,’ Representative Christopher Shays, a Republican from Connecticut, said at a hearing Tuesday that he would support issuing a subpoena to the Pentagon next week if it did not provide long-requested documents relating to the contract, which was awarded to Halliburton in early 2003 without competition.

As expected, Democratic congressman are not happy about the contact, and want to find out what happened to all that money. But the interesting thing about this article is it points to some pissed off Republicans, too. A bipartisan investigation should have no problem getting some answers. And those answers are not going to be good for some people in the White House *cough*Cheney*cough*

House Votes to Limit Patriot Act

Mark this in the 75% good, 25% bad column: the House of Representatives voted to limit parts of the Patriot Act.

In a slap at President Bush, lawmakers voted Wednesday to block the Justice Department and the FBI from using the Patriot Act to peek at library records and bookstore sales slips.

Despite a veto threat from President Bush, lawmakers voted 238-187 to block the part of the antiterrorism law that allows the government to investigate the reading habits of terror suspects.

The vote reversed a narrow loss last year by lawmakers complaining about threats to privacy rights. They narrowed the proposal this year to permit the government to continue to seek out records of internet use at libraries.

Unfortunately, this is not all good news. The provision to allow access to internet use records is still very troubling. Add this to some libraries testing biometrics-controlled access to public-use computers (courtesy of Shmoo), and there is still an awful lot of privacy being invaded here.

But still, this is a surprising step in the right direction. The PATRIOT Act was a terrifying law which trampled all over personal liberties. It is good to see actual bipartisan efforts to restore some of those personal liberties.

Let’s see… Shall we fund Big Bird or Haliburton?

A House subcomittee decided to eliminate funding for Public Broadcasting, apparently deciding that the money would be better spent on, say, Haliburton. “The goal is to kill all funding to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting within two years.

“A House subcommittee voted yesterday to sharply reduce the federal government’s financial support for public broadcasting, including eliminating taxpayer funds that help underwrite such popular children’s educational programs as ‘Sesame Street,’ ‘Reading Rainbow,’ ‘Arthur’ and ‘Postcards From Buster.'”