Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2003:September:05 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2003/9/5-6 [Computer/Networking] UID:10084 Activity:low
9/5     Home Networking problem.  I managed to get a set of 5 real IPs.
        (ok, 8... minus broadast, gateway, etc).  I want to set up a wireless
        network at home, as two of the computer, one wirelessl connected
        will be running server.  Ideally, I would like to have a sort of
        DHCP running so occationally, family member with their labtop can
        get a dynamic IP and access to the internet.  What kind of functionality
        should I look for when I am buying a wireless access point /router?
        \_ Uhm, get one with DHCP, what else did you think you need?  They all
           support DHCP.
           \_ most of them doesn'tallw you use real IP behind the
              wireless router
              \_ the servers shouldn't have DHCP addresses and the laptops
                 don't need real addresses and should be behind a firewall
                 anyway.  OP shouldn't be doing what OP is trying to do.
        \_ Hook up an 8-port switch (not a router, and no wireless) to the
           DSL/cable modem.  Any computer directly connected to this switch
           will need to configure a static IP.  Hook up wireless router (one
           with more than one Ethernet jack) to the switch.  DHCP and NAT will
           be active on the wireless router.  Now, anyone who plugs into the
           wireless router or turns on their wireless card will get a
           private dynamic IP.  Is that what you want?
           (The above assumes you are not using PPPoE.  Also, sometimes
           the ISP provides DHCP, too, so you won't need to configure
           static IPs on those computers directly connected to the
           8-port switch.)
           \_You can't be using PPPoE when you got static, it's usually
             an ADSL bridge type configuration if you have static. The ISP
             will not provide DHCP for a static service. DHCP needs to be
             configured on your end. If you do DHCP on the bridge, then it
             will assign either internal dynamic ips (in which cause you'll
             waste the statics) or use the static ips. AFAIK on the cheapie
             bridges they give you you can't do both, so you'll need to
             setup a DHCP server somewhere (you do not necessarily need it
             on the wireless part, in fact you can get a wireless access
             point and do DHCP on one of the static IP boxes if you install
             another ethernet card on it, but that is probably more trouble
             than just getting a wireless router and hooking it up to
             the bridge). You also don't need the switch if you've got
             what I think you have (i.e. cayman bridge with four ports
             on the back).
             \_ Actually, at the small office I worked last, we got static,
                and we got DHCP-assigned addresses through the DSL modem.
                Verizon.  I believe the DSL modem was a bridge, it never
                had an IP.
                \_ Yes, the bridge can be a DHCP server also, and it can
                   either serve static or internal IP addresses, it depends
                   on how you configure it. It cannot, unless you have a
                   a really advanced bridge, do both. In reality, all
                   DSL "modems" are bridges. The term modem refers to
                   modulation and demodulation, which never really occurs.
                   You can also setup the bridge so that it assigns certain
                   static IPs as dynamic, and certain ones remain configured
                   to point at specific MAC addresses. However, you usually
                   can't do both 192.x.x.x numbers and mix them with static
                   IPs. For that you essentially need to create a subnet off
                   of one of the static IPs and route it through a dhcp server.
                   \_ That DSL modem that behaves as a bridge:  I can't
                      configure it at all, it doesn't have an IP, doesn't
                      do DHCP serving itself, and it lets the upstream router
                      handle DHCP requests.  To end users, all they see is
                      DHCP being served, but it's not from the DSL modem
                      technically.  That's my interpretation.
                      Most DSL modems these days are smarter, I think.
                      \_ That doesn't sound like a very efficient setup from
                      the ISP's point of view. But since it's a small business
                      maybe that's the way they have it configured. Cable
                      modems are similiar, they "hide" the dhcp server within
                      the modem from the enduser, so you have to get unsupported
                      utils to mess around with it. I believe that the IP
                      address of your bridge should be the default gateway when
                      your dhcp is configured. See if you can login to it or
                         \_ Well, theoretically, but when you ping that IP
                            you notice 30ms pings.  That DSL modem just
                            doesn't have an IP; it's a bridge.
                            Anyways, that was three years ago.
2003/9/5 [Finance/Banking, Finance/Investment] UID:10085 Activity:high
        America's inequality is due to its rich people doing especially well
        compared to other countries' rich people.  It poor people is doing
        about the same as other countries' poor people.
        \_ You mean all those countries that don't even have a middle
           class, and where the poor have absolutely no mobility?
        \_ So to make this fair we should provide welfare for foreign rich
        \_ Bottom 80% of Americans only own 17% of the country's wealth.
           Hahaha! Poor bastards!
        \_ The rich are already doing so well, and we are still cutting
        \_ The rich are already doing so well, and they are still cutting
           their income tax and inheritance tax.
           \_ Leaving them more capital to create more jobs.
              \_ As Warren Buffett noted, giving more money to rich people
                 doesn't create more jobs--because rich people don't spend
                 as much of their money.  If you give money to people who
                 actually *need* it and will spend it, *that* will create
                 And more fundamentally, the fact that our rich are doing
                 better than other countries, but our poor aren't, is
                 *exactly the problem*.  -tom
                 \_ Buffett is a moron, and apparently you are too.  If rich
                    people don't spend the money on consumer goods, they'll use
                    the money in a different way--investing it, etc.  Even
                    putting it in a bank account allows more loans to people who
           \_ Leaving them more capital to create more jobs.
                    don't have the capital to make large purchases out of
                    \_ Nope, ultimately you need people to spend money.
                       Now ordinary Americans have too much debt already
                       and the interest rate is already very low.  You
                       want your average American to have even heavier
                       \_ You miss the part about loans to people who then
                          start small businesses which are the backbone of
                          the American economy?  Quoting Warren Buffet on
                          anything is akin to calling someone a Nazi in an
                          online debate.  It's pointless and demonstrates
                          lack of ability to think.  "He's rich so he must
                          know lots about macro economics!  Let's do whatever
                          this rich dude days because he's one of us!"  Uh huh.
                          \_ Quoting Warren Buffet is actually poignant in
                             this case.  Even Alan Greenspan acknowledges the
                             pure and simple fact that if you give the money
                             back to the consumer class, that it will have
                             more of an effect in the short term.  Giving
                             money to the investor class does nothing for the
                             short term, only potentially for the long term.
                             The investor class does nothing with the money
                             but hoard it and reinvest, that does not create
           their income tax and inheritance tax.
           \_ Leaving them more capital to create more jobs.
              other than "it makes me feel better to hurt someone else"?
                             jobs, that only creates wealth (which may create
                             jobs a ways down the road).  -mlee
              \_ Okay, by that argument if the government gave me a billion
                 dollars, I would automatically use it to hire a bunch of
                 Americans instead of blowing it on hookers, eightballs, and
                 multiple NASA space-tourism jaunts.  I say you give me the
                 money, and let's see what happens.
                 \_ Which would create more jobs for hookers, NASA workers, etc.
                    The money wouldn't simply disappear.  It gets put back into
                    the economy.
                    \_ Great, so pony up the cash, Daddy Warbucks.  Giving
                       me the money the rich would save in these tax cuts
                       would benefit the economy just as much as giving it
                       to them.
                       \_ Although it would create jobs for hookers, there are
                          more efficient ways of creating jobs.  You are not a
                          prime job creation engine for the economy.  Maybe in
                          another life you'll be Warren Buffet and people will
                          blindly quote you simply because you're rich.
                          \_ And any rich schmoe is a prime job creation
                             engine? Horsehockey.  Saying that we should give
                             tax breaks to the rich because they'll spend
                             the money and therefore employ people is not
                             only naive, it's perverse.
                          \_ There are "more efficient ways"?!?!  Yes, there
                             are, but going through gov't is guaranteed to not
                             be more efficient.
           \_ Dummy, by definition "the rich" are *always* doing well.  Is
              this so hard to comprehend?  The important part is *who* is
              rich, how did they get there, what are they doing to stay there,
              and how hard is it for someone else to get there?  Does raising
              taxes on "the rich" help the middle class or poor in any way
              other than "it makes me feel better to hurt someone else"?
              \_ The rich gain more from the promotion of a strong US
                 military, civil order, and national infrastructure than
                 do the poor, hence the rich should pay proportionately
                 more in taxes.  In addition, if the rich pay more in taxes,
                 the poor and middle class need not pay as much in taxes; if
                 this does not constitute help, I would like to know
                 what does.
                 \_ That's totally false. The rich actually use less gov't
                    resources than the poor, by far. If you are rich, you
                    can support yourself and don't require gov't intervention
                    in things like healthcare, housing, employment, childcare,
                    schooling, and sustenance. In contrast the poor drain
                    gov't resources like crazy. The poor also have bigger
                    families, and those families are gov't subsidized.
                    \_ You're missing the point:  the rich have more to lose
                       in the case of a weak military, civil disorder, and
                       a crumbling infrastructure (as business relies on
                       the infrastructure to make things run smoothly and
                       the rich depend on business).  They have more at
                       stake and therefore should pay more.
                      \_ Yeah why should I spend all that money on the
                         military to protect my total asset of $200
                         in the bank?  Since the top 1% has 50% of the
                         country's wealth, they should pay 50% of its
                         \_ 1) they don't.  2) they already pay more than
                            their percent income.  3) if you've got $200 to
                            your name and minimal or no income you're a
                            deficit, not a plus for the economy.  you're taking
                            out waaaay more in infrastructure costs than you'll
                            ever put back in.  how does water get to your tap?
                            who paves your roads?  who pays the cop that stands
                            on the corner?  puts out your fires?  brings food
                            to your local market?  runs wires to your hovel?
                            you can't even begin to pay for what you're sucking
                            from the tax payers in this country past, present,
                            and future.  you're a net loss.
                            \_ Where did you get the idea about "minimal or no
                               income"?  I am in the top 19% who thinks they
                               are in the top 1%.  In anycase, it's just to
                               illustrate a point.
                            \_ Check the tax tables: you're paying a max of
                               38%, and if you're that rich and can't afford
                               a tax-deductible accountant to steer you
                               through the loopholes, I have a bridge in
                               New York I think you might be interested in
              \_ Why yes, it does. Raising taxes on the rich allows more
                 spending on things like education, child care, and
                 health care that increase the standard of living of
                 the middle class and increase productivity for the
                 entire economy. Why do you think that European productivity
                 has been growing faster than American for over a generation?
                 If you look at stats for the middle 50%, you can see
                 that wages in America have stagnated for the average
                 worker, while they have gone up almost everywhere else.
                 Americans are working longer hours and seeing less
                 for it, while the opposite is true in the other
                 industrialized nations.
                 \_ Ask the typical out of work German or Frenchman how much
                    they enjoy the 2:1 taxpayer/leech ratio in their countries.
                    In a generation, it'll be 1:1 in several EU nations.  It
                    isn't sustainable.  The EU nations have sold their future
                    to their past.
2003/9/5 [Transportation/Airplane, Reference/Military] UID:10086 Activity:nil
9/4     Rather than building midget useless weak carriers that require
        vertical take off planes (which have worse performance than
        non-vertical take off planes), why don't the Brits just build a
        bigger carrier?
        \_ JSF
        \_ Because they can't afford one and putting all your eggs in one
           basket is both militarily stupid and inflexible.
        \_ The British have the right idea.  Vertical takeoff craft which
           are computer-piloted....  That's the way to go.
           \_ Until the FoF system tags a 747 landing at O'Hare as an
              incoming enemy bomber and kills a few hundred people.  The day
              they can take the people out of wars is the beginning of a
              perpetual war which won't end until all industrial bases are
              destroyed on one side or someone uses WMD on a large scale.
              \_ It's IFF
                 \_ Friend or Foe, thanks.
              \_ Watched T3, did you?
                 \_ Yes, but you apparently didn't.  That wasn't the message
                    in T3 at all.
        \_ it worked in the Falklands.  Also, the U.S. marines use Harriers
           too.  Nod to the can't afford comment above.
           \_ USMC has a pretty good reason for using Harriers.  As an
              expeditionary force, they can't rely on the existence of
              proper runways everywhere.
           \_ worked damned well in the Falklands actually.  OP, the Brits
              don't have any current concerns about taking on the USAF.  They
              don't need a USAF quality AF.  They just need enough to pretend
              to be a world power and smash second world Argentina quality
              nations every so often or back us up here and there for good PR.
2003/9/5 [Consumer/TV] UID:10087 Activity:nil
9/4     Anybody have Dish Networks with Local Channels?  Their web site
        claims that you need the 500 series receiver in order to recv local
        channels.  I'm wondering if that's a marketing ploy.  Anybody tried
        hooking up a 300 series receiver and see if it works?  One has to
        pay more per month to use the 500 series.  Thanks.
        \_ i got a free 2nd Dish 500 from them for getting local channels
           have to point it in a different angle
        \_ What you need is a Dish 500 *antenna*, not a particular receiver.
        \_ The locals show up as high numbered channels (the receiver then maps
           them to the local channel number).  My understanding was that you
           needed the 500 series system to get the high channels.  But I don't
           know if both receiver and antenna are necessary.
           \_ You just need the Dish 500 antenna.  The 500 series receivers
              are just their digital video recording products.  Local channels
              have been available for longer than the 500 series receivers...
2003/9/5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Korea] UID:10088 Activity:nil
9/4     I love this shit.  This is legalization of pirates in the high seas,
        and USA is leading charge:
        \_ pirates?  am i missing something here? it sounds like it's all
           the activity of various nations' navies.  when the US decides
           to let commercial fishermen with grappling hooks and hunting
           rifles board ships, then you can call it piracy.
           \_ Both of you should read up on maritime law before resorting
              to statements you can't back up.
              \_ it's not a question of maritime law, it's a question of
                 what the word "pirate" means.  If a warship attacks or boards
                 another vessel, that's not piracy.
                 "An armed ship or vessel which sails without a legal
                 commission, for the purpose of plundering other vessels on
                 the high seas."
              \_ in the good old days, you can't just goahead and board
                 other nation's ship in the internation water.  Am I
                 missing something here?        --OP
                 \_ you probably side with China in saying to stop WMD
                    you need to talk. Imagine if this program were in place
                    back in Oct 1962 - no Cuban Missile Crisis! Might makes
                    right - get over it!
                    \_ Don't you have any pride in our nation as a beacon
                       of hope for democracy and its ability to bring the
                       world together? Soft power and our ability to set
                       the world agenda towards human rights have earned us
                       much leverage and the admiration of the world. You
                       should reevaluate the nuance of soft power. --aaron
                 \_ when were these "good old days" exactly?  the good old
                    days are *right now*.  in _your_ good old days ships got
                    boarded all the time.  we called it piracy.  it still
                    happens in some back water parts of the world but is very
                    rare, that's why ships no longer carry canons, eh?
                    \_ that is my point at first place.  In name of
                       stopping WMD, we are acting like pirate of
                        caribean sea.  What happened if we are trying
                        board a North Korean ship boun to Syria in
                        middle of Indian Ocean, and North Korean in self
                        defense open fire upon US navy vessel?   -OP
                        \_ A military vessel stopping and searching a civ.
                           vessel on the high seas to search for contradband
                           is not piracy.  That should be your "point at the
                           first place".  Seriously, you're misapplying the
                           word.  You don't know what it means.  When a
                           US Navy destroyer or Coast Guard vessel stops a
                           ship, tosses the men overboard, sells the women into
                           slavery and keeps the cargo for later sale, please
                           post the URL on the motd and you can talk about
                           piracy on the high seas.  I think you're a troll.
                \_ The north korean ship is probably carrying nukes
                   or missiles or something nastier since that's about the
                   only thing north korea can export these days, so
                   I highly support boarding the bastards.  What do YOU
                   think the US should do?  Ignore it?
                        \_ "We sleep safe in our beds because rough men
                            stand ready in the night to visit violence
                            on those who would do us harm" - Orwell
                            \_ It's a nice quote and always true for any
                               society that has a substantial civilian
                               population going back to Rome and earlier.
2003/9/5 [Finance] UID:10089 Activity:nil
9/4     I am moving back to the Bay Area this fall.  What resonable
        storage places are there (for a piece of furniture and maybe books)?
        And any decent place on the Peninsula with affordable rent?
        \_ define 'affordable' for your situation.
2003/9/5 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:10090 Activity:nil 75%like:10080
9/4     Fart for Bush!
        \_ Is this for real?  If so what about idolatory being a grave sin?
2003/9/5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:10091 Activity:high
9/5     In the end, with regard to WMD, it's not the two-bit dictator Saddam
        who lied, but the Bush and Blair administrations.  Poor Saddam.  He
        had no WMD and had been telling the truth all along, hoping and trying
        hard to appease the US, while Bush and Blair lied to their
        citizens and to the world, patronizing and full of self righteousness.
        \_ you gotta learn to at least guise your troll. the post below is
                much better.
           \_ not really.  it only got 1 pathetic bite.  both are too
              obviously trying to pull heart strings and push hot buttons.
              \_ I think you just overwrote the second bite.
           \_ It's not a troll, but a irrefutable declaration of fact, and
              thus, no followup is expected.
2003/9/5 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:10092 Activity:high
9/5     $90 billion this year, $60 billion next year.  How much is the
        regime change Iraq war going to cost your typical family of 4 in
        total eventually?  $4000?
        \_ Ask the typical family of 3 that was a typical family of 4 before
           9/11 how much it's worth.
           \_ NO Iraq-9/11 connection! Never was never will be.
           \_ Not much, if it's determined Iraq never did pose an imminent
              threat, the WMD never existed, and the U.S. loses further
              credibility internationally.
           \_ now this is a good troll.
           \_ yeah, every single nukular family of 4 lost a member due to
              the attacks of 9/11.  thanks for reminding us.
        \_ $4000?  That's like 10 times the tax cut I am going to get next
        \_ Chump change. US has supported many initiatives like this in
           other countries that keep going on and on.
2003/9/5-6 [Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD] UID:10093 Activity:nil 62%like:27866
9/5     OpenBSD 3.4 is available for pre-order:
        \_ pre-order?  they can't *sell* me open source software!  Redhat and
           other Linux vendors don't force me to *buy* software.
           \_ Um, neither does openbsd.  Before you start ranting, do a little
              digging... -scotsman
            \_ Yes they can, and they've been doing it for years. Open Source
               Software doesn't mean that people can't charge you for it, it
               just means that you can copy/modify/redistribute it anyway you
               want. GNU used to sell their software for a couple thousand
               per tape/disk. Walnut Creek Software distributed *BSD for $30
               per kit way before the internet got popular.
               \_ To me that's not really "selling software" any more than
                  PBS pledge drives are selling those mugs and other gifts
                  you get if you donate money.
                  \_ where else can you get a Dr. Who mug where the TARDIS
                     dematerializes as you pour the drink in?  If BSD
                     people sold Dr. Who mugs I'd buy them, too.
2003/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:10094 Activity:nil
9/5     Dean and Clark to D.C. in 2004.
        \_ who's Clark?
           \_ Wesley Clark? Who is Dean?
        \_ It is way to early to be calling that one. -ausman
           \_ I don't think he's calling it, so much as hoping for it.
        \_ Gay marriages and socialized medicine for everyone -
           \_ awesome, I want!
              \_ awesome, *you* pay!
        \_ another 9/11 in 2005 if that's the case.
           \_ by foreigners or by insiders?
              \_ since we just diluted the value and meaning of citizenship
                 the other day by giving illegals drivers licenses, is there
                 really much difference anymore?
                 \_ the value and meaning of citizenship is to carry a
                    driver's license? I really think you misunderstand
                    what it means to be an American
                    \_ I didn't make that comment but it's a valid point. At
                       least it calls SOMETHING into question when "illegal"
                       immigrants are on public record, with kids in public
                       schools etc. If you want illegals to have this stuff,
                       then you should instead legalize them. Not have this
                       doublethink weirdness.
                       \_ once they're registered, how long do you think it
                          will be before INS starts using the database to
                          track them down?
                          \_ there will be a firewall between the departments
                 \_ Politicians are willing to tweak anything to buy votes.
        \_ Clark kills Santiago and becomes president.  Oh wait, wrong show.
        \_ Dean Cain plays Clark Kent in D.C. comic tv show: Superman
           \_ Played.  Tom Welling plays Clark Kent now on Smallville.
        \_ Quite seriously, how much is "red america" going to flip out
           if Dean wins the election? I guess nothing can be as bad
           as Hillary to them.
           \_ red america?  you mean the Communists?  what are you talking
                \_ maybe he means red-neck?
                   \_ I think he means red/blue like on the results maps of
                      the country during bush/gore.
2003/9/5-6 [Health] UID:10095 Activity:nil
9/5     Anyone here take flaxseeds (high omega-3).  Does it taste bad?
        \_ yes I do.  You can't taste it because it's in a gel capsule.
           Unless you're trying to drink the thing (I don't recommend that).
           \_ you can buy raw flaxseeds in supermarkets and they taste ok
              (almost no taste)
        \_ Flaxseed oil is supposed to add a nutty flavor to a salad....
        \_ Flaxseed gloop [Google for it, but don't bother with the
           cheesecloth method of separation] is a good egg substitute
           and adds a nutty flavor, but may not preserve the omega-3s.
           Anyway, they're seeds, so for taste think sesame, poppy, etc....
2003/9/5-6 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10096 Activity:nil
9/5     Disneyland Anaheim ride malfunctions.  1 dead, 10-11 injured.
        "The park is not very crowded, and it isn't really the madhouse you
        would expect. There is almost no information available about the
        accident - CMs persist in saying that nobody was hurt, that there
        was a problem with the Mark Twain, or that there are just 'technical
        difficulties' with the attraction.  The guests know something is up,
        partly because there are threehelicopters over the park, but mostly
        they just move on to another area." -Super Moderator on
        \_ a Mickey Murder
        \_ It's in Yahoo News now.
2003/9/5 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:29521 Activity:nil
9/5     Is Bush going to take back the "bring it on" comment he made?  With
        the number of people dying everyday I'd say that the bad guys have
        really brought it on.  I hope the french and the germans force bush
        to take back that statement before signing on to any UN resolution.
        \_ take back the one statement?  I'm sure the french and germans
           prefer the $ talking.  After all, $ is why the U.S. is asking
           for UN support.
        \_ "take it back"?!? what like apologise?
            1)  That would never happen
            2)  It would be a totally empty gesture.  "I'm really sorry"
                is going to get the world what exactly?  Bring people back
                to life?  Restore US credibility?  Maybe the French will
                say "it's all good, here's a few billion Euro" ???
            \_ You're right.  Resignation would be so much more appropriate.
            \_ You have just been trolled.  Thank you, come again!
        \_ Oh my the casualties are staggering! Shows how young and naive
           you are.
2019/08/23 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2003:September:05 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>