Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2002:October:12 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2002/10/12 [Academia/UCLA] UID:26155 Activity:low
10/11   hey, ucla.*guy: are you going to the Cal-SC game tomorrow? I'll
        be wearing my Cal Rugby shirt.
        \_ uh, not aware of any football game.  ucla cs guy
           by the way ucla ee guy, what's up? Hows it going?
2002/10/12 [Recreation/Media] UID:26156 Activity:very high
10/11   Are there any famous male Asian movie stars who don't do martial arts?
        \_ Rene Liu
        \_ "Challenge fresh squid!!"
        \_ Charlie Chan
        \_ George Takei
           \_ star trek, fencing.
        \_ Chau Yun-Fat.  He doesn't actually know martial arts, and he was
           already famous before Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.
        \_ toshiro mifune.
           \_ he doesn't know kendo?
        \_ the iron chef
        \_ not famous, but i always get a kick out of seeing that one asian
           guy with the receding hairline and ponytail who always plays a
           \_ I love this guy. He's actually been a good guy once or twice.
              Still no lines.. He's a great Token Gunman/Henchman (Asian).
           lackey for some bad guy. he was in Die Hard, and his latest role
           was in 24. he never gets any lines and is always carrying a gun.
           \_ Al Leung. I love this guy. He's my favorite Henchman/gunman.
                 \_ Leong
        \_ Can S.F.'s own James Hong do martial art? (aside from the fact he
           is 60+ yrs old)
        \_ I don't know any of the names above. I guess the answer is NO.
           no martial arts, no famous.
           \_ You don't know George Takei?  What color is the sky on your
              world?  It's most blue here but muddy brown in many urban
              world?  It's mostly blue here but muddy brown in many urban
              areas (places with lots of people in high density locations).
        \_ MILF MILF MILF
2002/10/12 [Uncategorized] UID:26157 Activity:nil
10/11   Has anyone else noticed that sol9 groupadd doesn't generate unique
        id's? I had to write my own one-liner to get unique gid's.
2002/10/12 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:26158 Activity:high
10/11   Do the Democrats have no shame? Character assassination forces
        Montana Republican out of race:
        \_ The quote at the end is the only thing that makes any sense in
           the whole article.
           \_ Yes, I'm sure the head of a gay rights group would say that and
              I'm not at all surprised that a motd poster would find that the
              only thing that makes sense.
        \_ Hint: smear campaigning isn't unique to the DNC.
           \_ URL or example please.
        \_ If something as paltry as that was enough to force him out of the
           race, he didn't belong in it to begin with.
           \_ It was Montana.  It wasn't paltry.  If he's smart, he's already
              loaded everything he owns and hit the road before a mob kills
              him.  Death isn't paltry.
        \_ uh, how is showing actual footage of the candidate "character
           \_ No cookie.
           \_ The music running behind the ad wasn't part of the actual footage.
        \_ What about just looking ugly? Bill Simon looks pretty nasty in those
           slow-mo, black&white Davis ads.
           \_ I don't know why Davis bothers.  Simon has a base of people who
              would vote for him simply because he's not Davis.  Nothing will
              change that.  Davis should be more worried about his own
              negatives because if he loses it'll be because too many stayed
              home or voted communist/green because Davis stinks too much.
2002/10/12 [Politics/Domestic] UID:26159 Activity:nil
        This is why we need govt. To protect idiots from themselves.
        Libertarian turns himself into a SMURF.
        \_ posted last week.
2002/10/12 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:26160 Activity:moderate
10/11   I just tried the WinAxe+ Xserver! It totally kicks ass!  I'm going to
        upgrade my net to run my apps on a Linux box in the basement and
        display them via WinAxe on my windows box at my desk. Should I go to
        Gigabit ethernet, or is 100 fast enough? I want it to feel as fast
        as if I were connected directly to the Linux box.  Does the desktop
        windows box need a fast processor to do this right?
        \_ Why not just run Linux on a single machine on your desk instead?
           \_ Because he also needs Windows apps which Linux doesn't provide.
           \_ there isn't QuarkXPress for linux.
              \_ dude like you should just use open source and write your own
                 and like itll be better than anything and itll be free and
                 you'll totally rule and be just like linus who answered an
                 email i posted once, well not really but he wrote back to
                 some guy who had a name that sounded like mine and it was
                 cool for me to think it was like linus really writing back
                 to me ya know and like then everyone will have free quake
                 express and we'll all write cool mods and new weapons and
                 maps and stuff and itll totally rock and USE LINUX!
                 \_ dont forget to ride bike
                    \_ dude theres no room for my rad linux on a bike! ive
                       got like my mp3 server with raid5 and 500+ gigs of
                       cool tunes and like i needed a hummer to carry it so
                       im, ya know, saving up for a hummer and itll have a
                       50 cal on a turret for better parking and itll be like
                       that open source guy who likes guns ill be like him and
                       have linux and ride hummer and be cool too!
        \_ XManager is pretty good, and cheaper. Kinda like WinZip, they ask
           you to pay, but don't stop you if you don't.
                \_ Does it have a full screen mode so my whole monitor
                   is in X land?
2002/10/12 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:26161 Activity:high
10/11   On why condos are a bad deal:
        1) you have high HOA rates
        2) value does not rise with rest of housing market thus putting you
           even further behind the curve if you want a house some day
        3) politics.  you have to deal with the condo board which consists of
           your neighbors.  the people most likely to run for board positions
           are typically those least capable of managing anything.
        4) #3 leads to the board not spending money wisely so when you roof
           falls in you have to beg the board who are typically *not* your
           personal friends to repair it.  repairing it will require an extra
           HOA fee because they spent out the budget on things like flowers or
           repairing *their* roof last year while there was still money.  you
           are *required* legally to pay whatever they say into the hoa fund.
           you can't sell and walk away because they'll put a lien on your
           unit which must be cleared before you can sell.
        5) there are probably other but #2, #3, #4 are killers.
        \_ There have been a few articles lately asserting that at this time,
           and particularly in our region, condos have been appreciating better
           than homes, though it could be skewed by being on the lower end
           and all the other issues are still deal stoppers for me.
           \_ if by "our region," you mean the Bay Area, your region
              is totally fucked.
        \_ #3 does it for me.  why not just rent, if you're going to have
           some nosey fucks telling you how to live anyway?
        \_ Tangentially related: in the past two years, a law was passed making
           it really easy to sue the condo builder. You can attend seminars on
           how to sue the contractor. Insurance rates for developers building
           condos have risen a few thousand dollars to 100k+. So if you're a
           bastard, buying a condo might make smart financial sense.
           \_ urlP?
           \_ you *really* don't want to get into a lawsuit over anything. why
              get into a long term situation where your only recourse is a
              lawsuit?  madness.
        \_ #2 is ridiculous. If this were true, condos would get cheaper and
           cheaper in comparison to homes. This has not happened.
           \_ Yeah, according to that theory, a crack house in Gardena or
              Hawthorne would be more expensive than a nice condo in Redondo.
           \_ Hmm, that sounds really familiar. -crebbs
           \_ Shrug.  Do your own math and bet your own money on it.  I don't
              care.  You're a motd poster, you must be right.
              \_ Condos are appreciating faster than homes:
                 But don't let mere facts get in the way of your prejudices.
                 \_ Wow, that means my best investment is a condo because we
                    know it'll eventually surpass the value of a house! Cool!
                    One year's worth of statistics during a recession is a
                    great way to determine your best housing buy!  Thanks!
                    \_ What it probably means it that sometimes condos
                       appreciate faster than homes, sometimes it is the
                       other way around. Are you really that dense?
                       \_ What it probably means is you didn't read the link.
                          If you read the whole article you'd see condos are
                          still a high-risk (ie: shitty) investment.  It's
                          *your* money.  Piss it away any way you'd like.  Life
                          does not have a save/restore feature.  Good luck!
                       \_ Bay Area is an extreme case, and is likely to
                          get more extreme in the future.  Condos doubling
                          or tripling in price within a few years is a
                          phenomenon that has happened in many cities in
                          the world before.
        \_ #2 is only true where there is ample land.  Your condo in
           Manhattan, San Francisco, or lake front Chicago appreciates just
           \_ You can't afford a condo in places like that.  If you could you
              could easily but a house in a normal place for cash.  Your point
              is meaningless in this context.
              \_ Just illustrating a point.  There is a continuum of places
                 from the Nevada Desert to San Francisco.
                 \_ Yes and some people buy branded water for their dog, too.
                    I don't.  I doubt you do either.  There's no point in
                    bringing up the extreme cases.  Stat 2.
              \_ Not really, because my choice is either a condo in San
                 Francisco or a house in Union City or Vacaville.
        \_ The choice is not between house and condo, the choice is between
           rent now and buy house in some distant future, or stop renting and
           buy condo now.
           \_ And get stuck in condo... forever.
           \_ Or rent now and still can't afford a house in some distant
        \_ So what is the deal with houses in planned neighborhoods that have
           HOA dues?  Are those just as bad?
           \_ No.  I pay $65/month to cover basic front yard gardening and
              other trivia.  They have nothing to do with my roof getting
              repaired or not.
        \_ So some people are whining that #2 is invalid.  No one has yet to
           explain why condos are still a good idea given #1,#3 and #4.  Even
           if I grant #2 is invalid (which I don't but go with me here), the
           others should be enough to make any sane person run screaming into
           the night.  When I rent, the apartment is a throw-away.  When it
           gets dirty (about the time the lease ends), I just move to a new
           one.  With a house, I own it, so I'm damned well going to take care
           of it.  With a condo, I get the worst of both worlds.  I don't own
           all of it but have other people forcing me to spend my money in
           stupid ways.  It's insane.  I'd rather rent and not get into a
           deeply financially risky situation I have limited control over.
2002/10/12 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:26162 Activity:high
10/11   Condo owners and people who bought housing in Oakland: sorry, didn't
        mean to upset you.  It's just the way things are.  We all make
        mistakes sometimes.  [please stop erasing my apology]
2002/10/12-13 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:26163 Activity:high
10/11   Stupid unix question.  I have encounter problem like this quite
        often and don't know how to deal with it.  Let say, I am trying
        to rename all the file in a directory, which the new filename
        is actually based upon the old filename except the filename
        extension...  something like
        mv *.aaa *.bbb
        or, in recent case, I am trying to convert whole bunch pdf files
        to text using ps2ascii where i need to supply both input and
        output filename, which is only differ in filename extention.
        So far, i can only do so in 2 steps, using sed/awk and a temporary
        file.  Is there anyway I can do that in one single command?
        I have tried using find with the -exec, but never get it to
        work.  Thanks                   kngharv
        \_ not great, but:
           bash -c 'for i in `ls *.ps*`; do ps2ascii -o $i $i.txt; done'
           it sucks because you'll end up with stuff called
        \_ in bash:
           for f in *.ps; do ps2ascii $f ${f/.ps/.txt}; done
        \_ in sh:
           for i in *.ps; do ps2ascii $i `basename $i .aaa`.bbb; done
        \_ in csh/tcsh:
                foreach f (*ps)
                        ps2ascii $f $f:r.txt
            \_ not working: f: Undefined variable.
        \_  I don't think that was a stupid question. Thanks for asking!
        \_ For all file rename it is good to use shell command like friend
           above say.  Using shell command best way renaming many file at once.
           \- if you are familar with regular expressions and emacs, there
              are various ways to do this using 'dired'.
              this is an age-old question in one of the FAQs ... probably
              the shell faq. --psb
        \_ Thanks all for answering... trying now :p  kngharv

        \_ /bin/ls *.ps > temp1
           vi temp1
           !Gawk '{print "ps2ascii",$1,$1}'
           chmod +x temp1
           \_ whose did you use?
              \_ since i am a csh kind of guy, i tried the csh solution.
                 It didn't work... error message is
                        f: Undefined variable.
                 nevertheless, i think this motd message is still helpful
                 as I will now look at the precise syntax of foreach
                 statement in csh/tcsh
                 \_ Try the same thing in tcsh.
2002/10/12-13 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/TJB] UID:26164 Activity:moderate
10/12   tjb-incarnate spotted.  Flyers outside of Soda/Etcheverry.
        \_ Sounds like A Beautiful Mind.
        \_ this is so fake.  he actually says aluminum foil is a defense
           against the government's "secret weapon".  and you don't seem to
           understand what "incarnate" means.
        \_ tjb was so much more amusing.  this guy is just a crackpot
2002/10/12-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:26165 Activity:very high
10/12   You'd figure a pacifist country like this wouldn't be a target, but:
        \_ "According to a government spokesman Mikko Norros, a foreign
           terrorist organisation is not believed to have been
           responsible for the bomb - rather a deranged individual or
           an organised crime group. "
           personaly, I believe him.  they're finns.  what motivation
           do they have to lie?  as to pacifism, finland has mandatory
           military service for all men.  no cookie.
           \_ more like swiss "armed neutrality"
              \_ well, I think it's more just "hey, let's not get fucked over
                 by russia like all the other countries nearby"
           \_ *laugh* You're so naive.  Yeah, the first time in history that
              the mob has used a suicide bomber.  That makes a lot of sense.
              Duh, by definition anyone who blows themselves up in a mall is
              deranged so that's a meaningless statement as well.  It was your
              standard PLO/Hamas style suicide bombing in a public shopping
              center.  Just like the French trying to claim the tanker wasn't
              an act of terror, also.  A five year old could see this govn't
              spokesman's statement is ridiculous.  They haven't even collected
              all the body parts and he's already claiming it wasn't an act of
              middle-east style terror.  Nonsense.
              \_ The person jumping to conclusion is the person who said:
                 "You'd figure a pacifist country like this wouldn't be a
                  target, but ..."
                 \_ This is a silly response.  The motd isn't a public forum
                    and I doubt the OP is an official government spokesman
                    feeding propoganda to the public.  You're ducking the
                    issue.  I stand by what I said before: they haven't even
                    collected the body parts and know almost nothing about
                    what happened when this mouthpiece puts out official word
                    that it wasn't an act of middle eastern style terrorism,
                    but was instead some garbage about the world's first
                    suicidal mafia hit (on a mini mall, no less).  For now,
                    I'm willing to grant them benefit of the doubt on not
                    releasing identifying details about the bomber beyond his
                    age and gender, but they don't get that benefit forever.
                    \_ i'll keep being naive and you keep being paranoid,
                       and we'll see who has a better life.
        \_ This is why we need a regime change in Iraq. Terrorist attacks will
           continue while Saddam is in power. -G.W. Bush
2019/01/20 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2002:October:12 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>