Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2002:March:05 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2002/3/5 [Finance/Investment] UID:24024 Activity:very high
3/4     the economy is on its way to a robust recovery!  hail bush!!
        \_ the economy is recovering.  as much as I despise the previous
           president, he did nothing to kill the economy, he did nothing to
           make it great, he did nothing either way.  neither did bush.  the
           feds don't fully understand how the economy even works and the
           president, whomever it might be at any moment, has near zero
           influence on it in the short term.
           \_ Bush's effect on the economy was to make a strong stand against
              terrorism and have success in the military operations, which
              improved consumer confidence.
              \_ Consumers were already spending like mad even through the
                 worst of it.  --voted for Bush but won't make up stuff
           \_ so who has the most effect on the economy? -clueless
                \_ yer mom.  the market crash was caused when she raised her
                \_ greed, when enuf fools will keep the rally going more fools
                   will jump in, if enuf fools want to crash the market to
                   lower stock prices, more fools will short to crash the
              \_ Alan Greenspan probably has the most influence (in terms
                 of individuals). Other than Greenspan, its probably the
                 big banks/investment firms (JP Morgan, Chase, Citicorp,
                 Morgan Stanley, etc.)
                 \_ Unfortunately, Greenspan loses out to world events,
                    wars, political strife, terrorists, and act of God.
                    \_ Can anyone help me with my enron stock? --God
                       \_ I don't think so.  Swap your enron for my wbvn?
                          \_ Or Be.
              \_ The nerds did.  They created the tech boom, and also the
                 internet boom and bust.
                 \_ i met a guy on greenspan's staff. trust me: those
                    guys are nerds too.
                 \_ nerds didn't make the boom and bust.  Stanfurd farmers
                    did.  I met exactly one other Cal person working for
                    tech companies in the last 7 years.  I suspect everyone
                    from Cal (except me) is either going on to post-BA/BS
                    or is now farming pot in bulk somewhere in the outback.
                    \_ 7 years and only one other Cal grad?  Where have
                       you been working?  I've worked 7 yrs and I've
                       worked with 6 Cal grads.
                    \_ I graduated in 97 and I've worked with dozens of cal
                       grads at cisco and sun.
2002/3/5 [Academia/UCLA] UID:24025 Activity:very high
3/4     So far, I've gotten my rejections from ucb, cmu, and mit. Nothing
        from Stanford, UW, and UT. Your turn.
        \_ Okay, I reject you, too.  It's nothing personal, though.
        \_ CS Masters or Ph.D?
                \_ what difference does it make. He/she got rejected.
                   \_ trying to understand the facts.
        \_ As mentioned before I got into UCLA (EE Masters). Still
           waiting for Cornell, UCSD, USC and Stanford.
           \_ UCLA is a pretty decent school.  Don't feel too bad.
           State school, Missippi, Palm Beach Tech, and DVC.  The DVC rejection
           *really* stings but I think I'll get by.  Maybe I can transfer later
           on, eh?  Is that possible if I get to know a prof there?
              At least one of those remaining schools will say yes.
              \_ Yay pretty decent :(
                 \_ for those of us who are too dumb to pass the
                    subject gre, pretty decent is great. At least
                    ucla is tier 1. Imagine the poor slobs whose only
                    option is Hayward State, SJSU or SCU. That would
                    \_ If you can't get in to a real school then you might
                       consider getting a real job instead.  What's the point
                       in getting a degree from a place like Hayward?
                                                             \_ or UCLA?
                                        UCLA is tier1 according to _/
                                        us news. It may not be the
                                        best prog. but it is much
                                        better than state school (ie
                                        hayward, sjsu, calpoly), most
                                        of the other uc's and many
                                        of the big name east coast
                                        private schools for EE/CS.
                                        \_ "First tier" == top 10.
                                           UCLA isn't top 10 in CS
                                           (though to be fair it is in
                                           some things).
                        \_ shockingly, a degree is more than something you
                           put on your resume so you can get a better job.
                           \_ A degree from Hayward isn't.
                        \_ only if you are changing fields, perhaps.
              \_ I'm pretty sure USC will say yes. Probably Cornell
                 as well since I applied to the M.Eng program (ie
                 the 1 yr degree factory for "professionals"). I don't
                 know about Stanford and UCSD. I probably won't go
                 to SD even if I get in so I don't care. I'm not sure
                 what I'd do if I got into the farm as I'd have to
                 keep working (I applied for honors co-op, so that
                 my company would foot the bill).
                \_ I'm guessing you applied for Fall 2002?  Or has was this
                   some time ago when you applied?
                   \_ I applied for Fall 2002 everywhere except for
                      the farm. I had to apply for winter 2003 at the
                      farm because of certain restrictions on "education
                      funding" at work in the 2002 calendar yr.
        \_ I got into: MIT, Yale, Cal, Harvard, Princeton, CMU, Stanford,
           Cornell, and my back up, Oxford.  I got rejected from every Cal
           State school, Mississippi, Palm Beach Tech, and DVC.  The DVC
           rejection *really* stings but I think I'll get by.  Maybe I can
           transfer later on, eh?  Is that possible if I get to know a prof
           \_ is yale good in computer science?
                \_ no. and fuck yale
           \_ why are you doing this to the "poor" person.
                \_ It's easy?
           \_ You have a tiny little penis
              \_ Yermom didn't say that.
                 \_ Yermom didn't want to hurt his feelings. She's sensitve
                    like that.
           \_ As a note, many of the lower tier schools reject outstanding
              students based on the idea that they know they are the backup
              plan and don't want to waste their time on someone they are
              fairly sure is going to go someplace else on scholarship.
2002/3/5 [Academia/StanfUrd] UID:24026 Activity:nil
3/5     watch larry king live tonight: stanford profs are pedophiles.
        \_ or read the transcript:
        \_ Why would anyone want to watch larry king alive or dead?  He's
           an incredibly boring interviewer.  If it wasn't for Ross using LK's
           show to announce his run no one would know who the hell LK is today.
2002/3/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:24027 Activity:very high
3/5     I miss Berkeley and the whole "free speech is only for people who
        think like us" mentality.  Especially when it's a bunch of racist
        thugs screaming it the loudest.
        \_ i can never remember if the post or times is the Moonie
           mouthpiece, it all looks the same in lynx, anyway
           \_ The Washington Times is a front for the Moonies. Their first
              editor quit in a public press conference saying such.
              \_ Uhm, where is there anything moony related in this article?
                 Did you even read it or is this the standard motd knee-jerk
                 anti-WT noise spewing forth again?
                 \_ I am responding to his question which one is Moony crony
                    \_ Which still has nothing to do with the article.
                       \_ I can read that dipshit, I'm answering the other ?
               \_ It has to do with the credibility of the source.
           \_ The WT is definitely the Fox News of newspapers.  However,
              Berkeley's reaction to that militant Israeli and the city
              council's reaction to Dean putting remarks on her web page
              regarding the antiwar resolution support the claim.  Free
              speech is reserved for the liberals, in the minds of some
              in this city.
                \_ NY Times good. Washington Post good.
                   NY Post a joke. Washington Times a joke.
              \_ What's wrong with Fox News?  Fox >> CNN >> M$NBC for decent
                 reporting.  CNN has reporters all over the planet so they
                 get stories out first but otherwise they're crap.
           at the end of this article:
            Last spring, conservative writer David Horowitz's speech
            about reparations ended abruptly when a member of the audience
            yelled at Mr. Horowitz for placing an ad in the campus
            newspaper critical of the idea of black reparations.
           Which is incredibly misleading.  The whole point of
           horowitz being on campus was to talk about his ad,
           and I think he fled abruptly just so that he could claim
           later that evil berkeley liberals forced him out of
           Berkeley (which he did). - danh
                \_ Were you there?  There was a problem with his ad?
                   I'll give you an example - have you compared the
                   amount of time threads from liberal sites stay
                   up on the MOTD vs conservative.  I have
                   deliberately posted both to see.
             \_ yes I was there.  horowitz's ad campaign was a giant
                scam, reperations for slavery isn't that hot of an issue,
                but college newspapers all over the country were
                suckered in by it, the most visible case was the daily cal.
                i get the feeling that the major newspapers are getting
                all of their info about the mecha vs cal patriot
                fight from a really biased reporter inside of the daily
                cal and they're not going around checking with any
                sources, but i can't prove it.  whichever daily cal
                reporter who keeps mentioning the cal patriot and
                the horowitz talk in the same articles obviously
                wasn't actually there and is asking only the cal patriot
                about what happened at it. - danh
                \_ I hate the Daily CAL!!!! total POS           - rory
                   \_ what a shock--URL's intended to piss off intelligent
                      people get deleted!
                      \_ Leftist URLs dont piss off intelligent people.  They
                         appeal to us for their humor value.  --conservative
                         \_ freerepublic URL's appeal only to morons--it
                            has nothing to do with their politics.
                                \_ Ask yourself why the military is
                                   overwhelmingly conservative.
                                   \_ Nice argument.  Conservatism is good
                                      because people in the military are
                                        \_ I was once a empathic liberal.
                                           Eventually, you realize that
                                           culture not predicated on
                                           responsibility and self-reliance
                                           is doomed to destroy itself.
                                           You wake
                                           up and realize how screwed up
                                           most of our institutions have
                                           become.  Life really is black
                                           and white.
                                           \_ Bill Clinton - self-reliant,
                                              self-made man.  George Bush -
                                              daddy's boy.
           \_ It's not about an idiot like Horowitz.
                \_ why am i the only person who ever signs their name around
                   here?  damn.  -danh
                   \_ Because you are the only person in this debate
                      saying anything worth putting one's name behind.
                      (yes, i know it was a rhetorical question)
                   \_ Because it's the motd and it doesn't matter *who* is
                      saying a thing, it matters *what*.  The issue of *who*
                      only clouds the topic with personal attacks (as always).
                      Knowing who posted something doesn't make their point any
                      stronger or weaker.  Posting one's name is merely an
                      option most choose not to take.
                        \_ ok that's a valid point.  i just think it's funny
                           every other post is unsigned! - danh
2002/3/5-6 [Academia/GradSchool] UID:24028 Activity:high
3/5     How are May grads doing on their job searches?
        \_ sadly.               - may grad.
        \_ sadly.               - may grad.
        \_ Great! - May 2000 grad.
        \_ Grad schools ho! - May 1999 grad.
           \_ Moi aussi! - May 97 grad
              \_ Moi trois. - May 02 grad.
           \_ Hoes ho!
        \_ jobs are suck.    -may 1998 grad.
           \_ My job search is going great! I can hire people at $8/hr!
2002/3/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:24029 Activity:very high 66%like:23990
3/5     VOTE!
        \_ Does it really make a difference if a few people here and
           there don't vote?
           \_ have you been asleep since 2000?
              \_ It's called sarcasm.
           \_ Every felon and illegal alien must vote or their rights will be
              trampled upon!  They might be put in prison or kicked out of the
              country!  They should vote and vote and vote some more!  Like
              a few places where Gore got %106 of the registered voters!  Now
              *that* is true democracy in action!
              \_ Don't you know, when you vote democrat its democracy in
                 \_ You lame-asses think you're funny but you're not.
                    Something like 30% of black people in Florida can't
                    vote because of left-over policies from post-Civil War
                    preventing convicted criminals from voting. You think
                    that would've swayed the election?
                    \_ Bullshit.  There are states all over this nation that
                       don't allow felons to vote.  If you can't get it right
                       don't come here and fucking LIE.  It has nothing to do
                       with being black or the civil war, you twit.  It has to
                       do with voting being a right of full citizenship and
                       a convicted felon is someone who has chosen to give up
                       some of those rights which also include things like
                       freedom of movement.  Take the hint, race baiter.
                       \_ Your ignorance is sadenning and your bitterness
                          indicative of the fact that you'd rather not talk
                          about real issues. Who is baiting whom?
                          You are right that Florida is not the only state
                          to ban felons from voting-- there something like
                          12 (mainly southern... read racist) states that
                          still uphold this practice. Florida was mentioned
                          because this was one instance were the 30% of
                          inelligible blacks would most definately have made a
                          difference. It is common knowledge that Republicans
                          want less people to vote because it helps them
                          win... and this is just another way to acheive that.
                          ... and to say that it is not a race issue, all you
                          have to do is look at who is convicted of more
                          felonies in this country.
                          \_ Why should convicted felons be allowed to vote?
                             Do you really think that society would be better
                             if we let convicted criminals influence the
                             electoral process?
                             And of all those black people who were convicted
                             of a felony, do you really believe that the vast
                             majority of them were false convictions?
                             \_ We let them out of jail didn't we? Noone is
                                talking about letting inmates vote. But isn't
                                the point of a prison sentence to serve time
                                and return to society? Being a member of
                                society means being represented... which
                                means you should have the right to vote.
                                \_ Like having the right to vote against
                                   laws that will put you behind bars for
                                   doing the same shit that landed you in
                                   prison the first time? Hmm.
                                   \_ cute.
                              \_ in regards to the 2nd point, no, clearly
                                 the vast majority are not "false
                                 convictions." However, (1) post Civil War
                                 when these felon disenfranchisment laws
                                 were made, in many southern states,
                                 felonies were extended to many many things
                                 including such things as "loitering",
                                 allowing the laws to be unevenly enforced
                                 by racist law enforcement. Many of these
                                 laws (like the disenfranchisement) are
                                 still on the books. (2) You need to
                                 consider the bigger picture. I'm not
                                 saying, "blacks are always falsely
                                 convicted of felonies." I'm saying "Why
                                 are blacks convicted of so many felonies?"
                                   \_ Blacks are convicted of so many felonies
                                      because blacks commit many felonies?
                                      Is it politically incorrect to state
                                      the obvious?
                                      \_ Divide society into several groups.
                                         Now say that in each group, the
                                         number of people who commit crimes
                                         is epsilon. It seems that epsilon
                                         is about the same for all groups
                                         except blacks. And he wants to know
                                         why. It is a legitimate question.
                                   \_ Granted there are many such laws on
                                      the books, but do you really think that
                                      someone is going to get convicted of
                                      a felony loitering if all he was doing
                                      was loitering? I see nothing wrong with
                                      convicting a person for felony loitering
                                      if he was also guilty of some other
                                      serious crime for which there was
                                      insufficient evidence. Its like putting
                                      capone away for tax evasion.
                                      As far as the "why blacks are convicted"
                                      bit, maybe they are convicted because
                                      they commit more crimes? I don't buy
                                      the bs that society programmed them to
                                      do this sort of thing. Do unto others
                                      isn't all that hard to understand.
                                      \_ In response to above two posts...
                                         fine then... you are just creating
                                         another level of indirection. The
                                         question then simply becomes "Why
                                         do blacks commit so many more
                                         This thread has become long and
                                         unwieldy... perhaps we should take
                                         it off the motd.       - rory
                                         \_ It's alright to say it.
                                            \_ huh?
                                               \_ The obvious answer to "why
                                                  blacks commit more crimes."
                                                  \_ oh right... yeah, this
                                                     is generally the point
                                                     in the discussion where
                                                     people go, "shit, I
                                                     should go join the KKK
                                                     or shut-up."
                                                     (notice the replies
                                                     dried up)
                \_ i'm sure statistically it didn't matter that much
                   but Florida was one of two states that hired
                   a private company to go through voter rolls, find felons
                   and mail them that they couldn't vote.  yes this was legal,
                   but in several cases, they were wrong, picked people
                   who had the legal right to vote, and they showed
                   up at the polling place and told they couldn't vote.
                   imagine if you were told you could not longer vote, you
                   didn't vote, then you find out later it was all a mistake?
                   i'd be incredibly pissed.  salon did several articles on
                   this. - danh [motd format daemon]
                   \_ Or imagine you're in the military and your perfectly
                      ballot delivered in a perfectly legal and timely manner
                      was thrown away by an elections official?  You voted,
                      you voted legally, you were legally entitled to vote,
                      your ballot arrived on time, and then your ballot was
                      tossed out.  Salon did not do several articles on this.
                           \_ Maybe because it didn't happen.
                              \_ It happened in several south florida
                                 counties but was under reported.
2002/3/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:24030 Activity:very high
        HARRISON BERGERON by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
        \_ What the fuck?  Is this supposed to make me vote Republican?
           Give me a fucking break.
           \_ No, moron.  It's a classic work of literature.  This is one of
              those great free-beer things the net has to offer which I'm
              sharing with your stupid ignorant empty headed addled low-browed
              self.  There's nothing in there about Republicans.  So stupid,
              so blind, so young....
              \_ go fuck yourself.
                 \_ *laugh* well you sure showed me wrong about you!
                    \_ go fuck yourself.
                       \_ ouch, now _that_ hurts my feelings.  gosh, can't we
                          just all get along?
        \_ I read that in a high school reader.  It was before I had read
           Slaughterhouse 5, and before I had any idea that Kurt Vonnegut
           was a name to remember.  Thanks.
                \_ is Slaughterhouse 5 a good read?
                   \_ yes.
        \_ This reads like a cheap Ayn Rand imitation, and that's not a
           very high standard.  I hope this was a draft and Vonnegut had
           planned to turn it into a real novel some day.
           \_ My silly friend, you are not in a position to critique Vonnegut,
              or state what a 'real' novel is.  Rather than trying to put down
              Vonnegut's work, which will not get the attention of most people,
              why not accept the fact that intelligent people like Vonnegut
              have politics that disagree with your own?
              \_ QUIT making strawmen.  I have no beef with his politics.
                 I just hate when people try to pass off hyperbole as theme.
                 This is like 4th grade writing.  Why not just write an
                 essay complaining about affirmative action or talk about
                 life in socialist countries?  More effective and less tongue
                 in cheek.
                 \_ What I am trying to say is that this ISN'T 4th grade
                    writing.  You didn't write like this in 4th grade, and
                    neither did I.  Good writing is difficult, and this was
                    good writing, even if the subject matter rubs you the
                    wrong way.
                    \_ This story was terrible. It reads as if it was
                       written by a student in 9th grade english class.
                       The basic idea is fine, but the treatment very
             \_ He knows how to read that makes him just as valid a critic
                as anyone else.
        \_ It's just a short story.  I don't know if there's a novel in
           there.  It makes its point fairly well, and succinctly.
        \_ When it's convenient for me to feel fatalistic, I like to read
           _Sirens of Titan_.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2002:March:05 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>