| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2000/6/16 [Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:18484 Activity:low |
6/15 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/20000615/aponline154508_000.htm Man convicted of killing gay dog. \_ Those fuckers give a 404 for incorrect Referrer field in the http request; search for "gay dog" under "AP" to get the article \_ Worked for me. |
| 2000/6/16 [Uncategorized] UID:18485 Activity:nil |
6/14 \_ I see. For near-sightedness, how does 20/xx translate to/from
the number of "degrees" that some people use to measure near-
sightedness?
\_ maybe you mean diopters. there's only approximate
relations between 20/x ratings and diopters.
see http://www.lpf.com/source/rk/20something.html
\_ I don't know. I was told that my short-sightedness is
simply "550", and everyone in my home country seems to
understand it.
\_ That's probably meant as -5.50 |
| 2000/6/16 [Science/Disaster] UID:18486 Activity:insanely high |
6/15 Civil E question (since I'm no expert)/
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/projects/bay_bridge/bbfin.htm
The western span looks like a normal suspension bridge but what's
with the eastern span? Wasn't the whole premise of the bridge
redesign to make it more earthquake proof. I thought the old
bridge collapsed during the World Series earthquake because it
wasn't a suspension bridge but a regular type. So why is 1/3
of the eastern span supported on cable stays but the other 2/3
not. And why is there a bend in the bridge. What's the point
of making a road bend over water?
\_ I'm sure anonymous cowards on the MOTD know more about
bridge design than the engineers and architects working
on the project. -tom
\_ It didn't "colapse". One of the sections on the top deck fell
down, which is what it's designed to do (be flexible between
single pieces, as opposed to having a big rigid bridge.) That's
what the metal joints that make your car go clickety-clack are for.
Regarding the bridge types, I seem to recall from somewhere that
the western span was build as a suspension bridge, since it needed
to be high enough for large ships to pass under, and that such a
structure is the type that can be that high and long and still be
flexible enough to withstand wind and quakes and stuff. The other
part is that the water under the East span is shallower, so they
could sink more supports into it--look at a cross section of the
Bay floor. Anyway, weren't they supposed to replace the East
span? -John
\_ two constraints, the end points, and a third, treasure island.
\_ Have you driven on the current bridge? It should be obvious that
it's not a straight line from the road leaving the shore at Oakland
into the tunnel through Treasure Island - you have to bend somewhere
before the island, and you want a gradual curve, not a sharp turn
that will become a bottleneck and source of many accidents. |
| 2000/6/16-19 [Science/Space, Science/Disaster] UID:18487 Activity:high |
6/15 Civil E question (since I'm no expert)/
http://www.mtc.ca.gov/projects/bay_bridge/bbfin.htm
\_ I thought Willie and Jerry nixed this plan.
The western span looks like a normal suspension bridge but what's
with the eastern span? Wasn't the whole premise of the bridge
redesign to make it more earthquake proof. I thought the old
bridge collapsed during the World Series earthquake because it
wasn't a suspension bridge but a regular type. So why is 1/3
of the eastern span supported on cable stays but the other 2/3
not. And why is there a bend in the bridge. What's the point
of making a road bend over water?
\_ I'm sure anonymous cowards on the MOTD know more about
bridge design than the engineers and architects working
on the project. -tom
\_ geez tom, you sound awful bitter.... -mice
\_ I just have little patience for morons. -tom
\_ Then why do you keep reading the MOTD?
\_ When ye berate thy first clueless sodan,
then shall ye know, innocent childe.
\_ He belongs here.
\_ When thou beratest thy first clueless sodan,
then willst thou know, innocent child.
\_ 16th century spelling fixed
-motd archaic grammar god
\_ It didn't "colapse". One of the sections on the top deck fell
down, which is what it's designed to do (be flexible between
single pieces, as opposed to having a big rigid bridge.) That's
what the metal joints that make your car go clickety-clack are for.
Regarding the bridge types, I seem to recall from somewhere that
the western span was build as a suspension bridge, since it needed
to be high enough for large ships to pass under, and that such a
structure is the type that can be that high and long and still be
flexible enough to withstand wind and quakes and stuff. The other
part is that the water under the East span is shallower, so they
could sink more supports into it--look at a cross section of the
Bay floor. Anyway, weren't they supposed to replace the East
span? -John
\_ Isn't it bad to sink too many supports into the water? I
thought you wanted a few strong supports and have the
bridge be very flexible in order to help absorb the shock
of an earthquake.
\_ the water under the east span is shallow but there's
no bedrock after Treasure Island, it's all sediment.
That creates various engineering problems. -tom
\_ Where'd you earn your CE degree? Or are you just
playing one on TV?
\_ I make no claims of being an engineer. I just
happen to know that the lack of bedrock on that
side of Treasure Island is an engineering
problem. -tom
\_ Which is like saying, "I read something in a
newspaper article 8 years ago which was quite
obvious so I thought it belonged on the motd".
\_ Maybe you should, like, you know, read the
fucking thread before you start posting
idiotic non-sequiturs. Since you seem to
need the obvious pointed out to you: tom
was answering someone's question. He was
not farting meaningless noise into the motd
like it meant something -- that seems to be
your gig.
\_ tom does nothing but fart meaningless
noise into the motd. and since when does
tom need an anonymous loser to defend him
from anything? he's been logged on and
could've replied if he cared to. i don't
think 'non-sequiturs' means what you think
it means. (half a bonus point for the
movie title, and another half point for
the character name who first said it)
\_ two constraints, the end points, and a third, treasure island.
\_ Have you driven on the current bridge? It should be obvious that
it's not a straight line from the road leaving the shore at Oakland
into the tunnel through Treasure Island - you have to bend somewhere
before the island, and you want a gradual curve, not a sharp turn
that will become a bottleneck and source of many accidents.
\_ Two other reasons for a bend - they have to build the new
bridge around the old one, since they can't tear down the
old one until the new one is opened, and because not all
spots in the bay to anchor the supports are created equal.
Are you really so stupid you couldn't think of any one of
these three obvious reasons for a bend?
\_ Hello? It's the motd. |
| 2000/6/16-19 [Computer/SW/Unix, Computer/HW/Drives] UID:18488 Activity:nil |
6/16 Solaris Question. Currently I have several diskless solaris
boxes that mount thier root file system (/) from a rarp/bootp
server. I have observered that if this server becomes
unreachable, the diskless clients hang. In some cases the
diskless clients won't come back even if the nfs server becomes
reachable again. To solve this problem I wanted to have the
diskless clients use a ram disk instead of nfs for their root
file system, but documentation looks scarce. If anyone has
done this before or knows a good URL, I would appreciate it.
\_ Use cachefs or just go buy some disks already - there's no
excuse for diskless machines in this day & age.
\_ I'm using CP1500/CP2000 CPCI suncards and I can't have
a disk in my chassis setup since it won't be field tech
hot replaceable. I would use disk if I could. I'll
take a look at cachefs. Thanks. |
| 2000/6/16-19 [Computer/SW/OS/Solaris] UID:18489 Activity:very high |
6/16 Is there a way for a user to set the DNS search domain on a
UNIX (generic answer if possible; if not, what about sunos/solaris?
linux?)
\_ can't you twiddle around with LD_LIBRARY_PATH or something so
that an alternate library containing a gethostbyname is used
instead?
\_ Short answer: no.
Long answer: if you don't really need it to work for the whole
domain, you just have a couple of hosts that you want to work
then you can, for ssh, set them up with aliases in your
~/.ssh/config file. For most other programs that use the standard
system resolver (most of them, like ftp and telnet), you can set
the environment variable HOSTALIASES to a file which contains
aliases of the form:
alias fully.qualified.domain.name
Note, this won't work for ping because it's setuid and thus
HOSTALIASES isn't used to avoid security problems. --dbushong
\_ From 'man resolver' on Solaris:
The current domain name as defined in the system initialization
file resolv.conf can be overridden by the environment vari-
able LOCALDOMAIN. This environment variable may contain
several blank-separated tokens if you wish to override the
\_ Any reason this works on some domains (.ocf) and not others
(several)? (as seen from a linux box; doesn't recur on soda)
search list on a per-process basis.
Works on Solaris & FreeBSD - think it's part of standard BIND -alan-
\_ alanc: 1, dbushong: 0
\_ It's not a contest. You learn something new every day.
--dbushong
\_ alanc: -5 for giving a non-LINUX answer! Who cares
about that legacy Sun junk? And we all know freebsd
was dead the day Linus, Our Lord and Saviour, wrote
the First Line. main(){ printf("Linux Rulez! The
rest dr00l!!1\n";exit(1);} /* GPL DUDE! */
\_ You missed a parenthesis.
\_ I think I made my point.
\_ good thing linus wrote that first
line and not you.
\_ Not really. It's the same quality.
\_ ucb traitor. linux continues to be
a toy because it depends on coders
like you
\_ LINUX R000LEZ!! Y00 DR00LEZ!!!11
\_ Windows is installed on more
PCs than that crappy Linus.
\_ You must try harder my troll friend. Solaris &
Linux were both first released in 1991 - FreeBSD
didn't fork off 386BSD until a couple years later.
Sounds like Linux is equally deserving of the
"old legacy OS that should get out of the way"
title.
\_ Solaris was a real OS in 91. Linux was
lucky to not crash on boot. Solaris in
91 was a functional and stable OS. Linux
was lucky if the login prompt came up. I
*really* hate historical revisionism and
other forms of false comparison. Linux
never became mainstream and useful enough
to become legacy junk. It's just junk.
\_ Solaris wasn't usable until 2.4; I don't
remember when that came out but it
remember when that was released, but it
certainly wasn't in 1991. -tom
\_ I used SunOS 4.0.8 on a Sparc 1 in 1990.
--sowings
\_ Thanks; works perfectly on bsd/solaris -- but for some reason,
under linux, works only for some domains (eg ocf) and not
others with ping [works for all domains via telnet]. Would
be interesting to hear a reason...
\_ they could set up their own chroot environment with its own
hosts files setting the search path.
\_ Can a user set up a chroot? If you could do that, wouldn't
that make programs that expected to check trusted files in
/etc before going setuid insecure?
\_ No, and yes. See chroot(2). |