8/30     will mond prevail over dark matter?
        \_ maybe

8/30    Regarding the "minute taker is an idiot thread" from yesterday.  I
        suspect several people would be disappointed if this was buried and
        forgotten without corrective action:
        \_ Sorry for not commenting about this earlier; I don't normally read
           the motd, but someone forwarded it to politburo by mail. The
           comment was just a joke, attempting to make fun of the reputation
           of the CSUA for being male and insular. I'm sorry if it was taken
           the wrong way. I removed the paragraph from the minutes in
           /csua/pub/minutes.
            In the past, CSUA minutes have often attempted to cover meetings
           in a humorous way. This was meant in that context. If I had spent
           more time reflecting on how it might be taken, I might not have
           written it. --Galen
           \_Censorship is alive and well.
        \_ Personal responsibility aside, I'm disappointed in the lack of
           responsibility in the rest of the Politburo.  By their silence they
           tacitly support this behaviour on behalf of the CSUA.  -geordan
           \_ All CSUA members indirectly support this, but the Secretary
              needs to be able to figure this out. We can't police everyone
              all the time
              \_ No, we don't.  We're here right now saying this is bad and we
                 don't support it in any way, shape or form.  I not only
                 oppose it, I believe whoever wrote that garbage should be
                 thinking up a real nice apology for their next set of
                 minutes.  Fuck up in public = fix it in public and take your
                 lumps.
                 \_ I second this motion. I think that there are a lot of
                    other people who agree (and many who disagree as well).
            \_ Anonymous complaints on the motd, especially those about
               someone who signs their messages, are ignored. If you have
               complaints, complain to the politburo. The motd does not
               count for anything. --twohey.
               \_ Very poor form, twohey.  --scotsman
                  \_ I happen to agree with geordan here, but complaining on
                     the motd is _never_ the right way to get your point
                     across. --twohey
                     \_ Bullshit.  It was wrong.  Those with issues are not
                        the ones who fucked up.  We shouldn't have to complain
                        to the politburo, the motd, or anywhere else.  Take
                        some personal responsibility for your actions.  Just
                        because the source is anonymous and on the motd does
                           complaints get ignored.  Mail poliburo, or
                        not mean the source is wrong or can be so easily and
                        dismissed.  The politburo should have published an
                        apology without being told to by anyone.
                        \_ The motd *is* the wrong place for this.  Granted,
                           the secretary should know better, but since that
                           does not seem to be the case, whining on the motd
                           is the exact *wrong* course of action to effect
                           change.  It doesn't exactly give your position
                           much strength to lapse into excessive profanity
                           while complaining about propriety...anonymously...
                           on the motd -- the place where even technical
                           complaints get ignored.  Mail politburo, or
                           (heaven forbid!) the OSC if you want action.  -mice
           \_ Perhaps you consider this a bad thing, but the current politburo
              doesn't read the motd on a regulat basis (if at all), and thus
              were not even aware of this until we recieved mail on the matter.
              The motd is not a good way to communicate with the politburo. We
              probably will never even see said complaints. - ajani
              \_ The motd is the people's voice. Maybe the politburu SHOULD
                 read the motd (as crappy as it may be)... other than wall,
                 it's really the only thing that ties the CSUA together.
                 \_ INcorrect. It is not the voice of the people. Otherwise
                    it would not have been taken off the web page.
                    \_ and who made that decision? --Jon
                       \_ Does that matter? The point is that its for the same
                          type of reasons the minutes got condemned.
                          Plus, how many UCB undergrads use motd/wall?
                          \_ That's not relevant. The motd is not the voice
                             of UCB students, it's the voice of the CSUA.
        \_ It was taken out of context. Anyways, screw you politically-correct
           liberal femnazi commies.
           \_ Out of context?  You're an idiot.  And I doubt you're more right
              wing or conservative than I am.  You look left wing.  The right
              has this thing about personal responsibility for one's actions,
              not blaming them on other folks like you're trying to do.
              \_ It's not about left or right politics.  It's about general,
                 simple, social-skills common sense.  One would hope that our
                 elected officers have enough clue to realize that csua is
                 a larger community than the half-dozen politburo members.
                                                                      -mice
              \_ Gee, getting your panties all into a bundle eh? Can't you
                 even read? You're the idiot.
           \_ respect++
                \_ "might not have..."? this is the kinda stuff that should
                   have punishment of some kind, not just letting you erase
                   your tracks. the meeting minutes are official records, no?
                   leave them alone and deal with the consequences, hopefully,
                   in a future meeting.
                    \_TrollP?
                      \_ if you think it was a troll then you're "not getting
                         it".  lots of growing up to do around here....
                         \_ pot, kettle, black.  'nuff said.
                         \_ We agree twice. 1.) I have an exteremeley hard
                          time "getting" hyper-sensitive, whining children who
                          are so sheltered and spoiled that they can't find
                          anything better to whine about.  2.)  there is
                          undeniably a lot of growing up to be done here.
                   \_ Yeah, wouldn't want him to learn anything.  What we need
                      around here is a hangin'.
        \_ The fact that you guys still call yourself the politburo says
           it all.
           \_ yes, this is the only non-stupid comment in this thread.
        \_ The politburo shouldn't have to read the motd to know there's inane
           and generally 'bad' stuff in csua meeting minutes.  Doesn't any of
           you actually read the *official* minutes you're putting out?  If you
           did, why didn't the politburo note and immediately correct the noise
           in the minutes?  Or even better, not publish garbage like that?
           Living down to your own stereotype is hardly humorous.
             \_ take a lude.
                \_ wow d00d U R s0 kewl!  kan i B leik U?!
                                             \_ evidently not.
        \_ you don't know what came close to being buried this weekend.
           or torched.

8/30    What's the easiest way to get a range of ints in bash? I often use
        bash -c 'for i in `ls *.tla`; do foo; done', but how do I get
        bash -c 'for (i=0; i<100; i++); do foo; done'?
        \_ bash -c 'for i in `jot 100`; do foo; done'
           If that doesn't work, try using "seq" instead of "jot".

8/30    Is there a reason half the stores / restaurants still put your
        entire credit card number on the receipt instead of the last four
        digits?
        \_ It amuses me when people spout off about how it's crazy to
           use your credit card on the net because of bad security.
           to exploit the "bad security" on the web, you have to have a
           level of knowledge of computers that at least can get you a pretty
           decent job(unless you're a 12 year old sociopath).
           to steal a cc# from a trash can at a gas station, you need
           no special skills, and take no real risk.  never mind also
           that many of the waiters that tak your cc at a restraunt
           are working under the table and could jack you number with
           no one being the wiser also.  the whole system only works because
           most people are honest, and anyone who thinks otherwise is lying
           to themselves.
           \_ having your cc and exp date and that stuff isn't really helpful
              for most purposes. unless you have the resources to actually
              produce counterfeit credit cards, online stores usually require
              and validate your address, which does not show up on receipts.
              \_ lot's of places dont verify anything that can't be easily
                 found.  i know someone who used to be a sociopathic
                 12 year old, who got busted for this.
        \_ Because you sent this comment to the motd instead of to them?
           \- i think the WEEB concern is the ability to get say 10,000
              credit cards in a day. and then to have them sold en masse.
              part of this works because of honesty and part of it works
              because of marginal and average effort per #cc is high. ok tnx.