Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2003:September:21 Sunday <Saturday, Monday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2003/9/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:10270 Activity:nil
9/20    Family to lose home by eminent domain for Costco store,50
        \_ Funny thing is, she's willing to sell.  She just wants $2.13m for a
           property valued at $400k.  No sympathy here. URL:
           login: pwd: password
           \_ Eminent domain should not be allowable no matter how much she
              wants for it. They are building a COSTCO, not a bridge. --dim
           \_ You miss the point.  Her dollar figure is intentionally well
              beyond market value because, get this, *she doesn't want to sell
              at any price*!!!  Eminent domain is evil and gets abused for all
              sorts of shit.  It got so bad in CA with school districts(!!!)
              doing things like declaring eminent domain on some people's
              houses, then sitting on the land for 10-15 years and selling it
              for profit that there's now a law against just such a thing.  You
              should have tremendous sympathy for anyone who gets their house
              and property stolen by the government.  More so, it should piss
              you off unless you're some sort of socialist who doesn't believe
              in personal property rights.  And yes, I consider the government
              forcing me to sell my house to them at whatever they consider
              FMV without bidding, on their timeline, without recourse to not
              sell or find a higher bidder or any other options to be theft.
              You think the government is going to pay her $30k agent's fee to
              buy her replacement home?  That's $30k right out of her pocket.
              \_ I'm going to go out on a limb here and do the unthinkable (at
                 least on the motd):  I apologize.  In not offering sympathy
                 to this woman for trying to squeeze every penny out of the
                 the sale of her house, I did not mean to imply approval of the
                 sneaky and dastardly policy of using eminent domain to grab
                 land for a commercial venture.  Now, please go back to the
                 article and read the part where she says she was willing to
                 sell the house for $10 per square foot.  If she's not willing
                 to sell, she shouldn't have said she was-- at any price.
                 There's more to this story than meets the eye on both sides.
                 \_ My house has FMV of about $590k.  However, I would not
                    consider selling it for $590k right now if I was *forced*
                    to.  I'm not ready yet.  However, if I was offered some
                    ridiculously larger number, being forced to sell wouldn't
                    be quite so bad.  About 1.75x to 2x FMV would be about
                    right to get me to move without a lawsuit assuming they
                    covered all my related expenses in addition to the FMV.
                    Everything has a price.  FMV isn't enough money to get
                    99% of home owners to move without problems.  By definition
                    they can get FMV any time they want on their own schedule.
                 \_ well duh, there is a $ point at which people will give in
                    to eminent domain.  the point is that she shouldn't
                    be forced to give up her home.  people put a price on
                    the sentimental and priceless part of a home.
                    \- if you are interested in property rights and the law,
                       two interesting things to look at are: Spur Industries
                       v. Del E. Webb [494 P.2d 701], and the famous article
                       by Guido Calabresi and Melamed: Property Rules,
                       Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One view of the
                       Cathedral [85 Harvard Law Rev. 1089]. The case is
                       between two private parties but has a sort of interest-
                       ing outcome [the winner of the injuction, is liable for
                       money]. G. Calabresi was the deal of Yale Law School and
                       is now a Federal judge. --psb
2003/9/21-23 [Computer/Networking] UID:10271 Activity:nil
9/20    Recommendations for wireless access point and wifi card that
        work together well and have good security? TIA
        \_ What's "good security" mean to you?
           \_ Well, I bought an smc router, smc wap, and smc wireless
              card. The router is great, the wap with wireless card
              combo is worthless for security. Can't get the WEP keys
              to work, so I end up only having mac address filtering
              which I understand is not secure at all. If I can find
              something that is reasonably secure, that is, the avg
              Joe Schmoe will have trouble breaking into my system,
              then I'll be happy.
                \_ This is beside the point, but most of the dorks who
                   go WEP cracking (yes it is fairly easily doable) use
                   netstumbler/wepcrack, which can be detected pretty easily.
                   In fact, you can crash some Linux IP stacks running
                   netstumbler with malformed responses.  Something entirely
                   passive, like wellenreiter, doesn't have allow that.  -John
              \_ I tried using netstumbler to break my own WEP key and
                 after 24 hours of sniffing packets it told me it was 1%
                 complete. There might be some risk there, but it is pretty
        \_ Linksys 54G with card works great for me.  You shouldn't be
           relying on WEP for your security, though--there are lots of
           good ipsec implementations.  -John
           \_ Can anyone recommend an "ipsec guide for dummies" type of
                \_ No, because dummies don't use ipsec. has
                   some decent documentation, and if you ask, I can try to
                   explain how it works and help you out.  -John
2003/9/21-22 [Politics/Domestic/HateGroups, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:10272 Activity:nil
9/20    They Were White and They Were Slaves: The Untold History of the
        Enslavement of Whites in Early America
        \_ hi freak, the author is one of those tin foil hat types, and
           not the good kind.  I tend to almost immediately cast into
           the wastebasket any author who uses the phrase
           "The Jewish question".
  - danh
           \_ and even more great stuff: - danh
           \_ sloppy dan.  The author didn't use that phrase, the reviewer did.
              and your other link is just a list of other books written by the
              guy.  so what?  Anyway, are you trying to say that there were no
              debtor indentured servants/slaves in america?  go look up how and
              why the state of georgia was formed.  why be so conservative,
              dan?  what if some or even all of what this guy is saying is
              true?  have you done counter-research to show any of it to be
              false or you just "know"?
                \_ google for "michael hoffman" and "jewjitsu" - danh
        \_"The Scientist and the Gas Chambers In the mid 1990s Germar Rudolf
          was a researcher at the Max Planck Institute and a doctoral
          candidate in chemistry at the University of Stuttgart.
          His life changed radically, however, when a defense attorney
          hired him to furnish expert testimony and forensic samples
          from "homicidal gas chambers" at Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration
          camp. When Rudolf reported that according to his rigorous
          chemical analyses, no one had been gassed in those "chambers," ".
          Maybe you can get together with freerepublic guy and
          throw-all-the-palestinians-into-Jordan guy and form a boy
                \_ Why should I rely on the ramblings of a nutcase?
                   Plus I think forcibly marching over the ocean entire
                   populations of Africans to America probably resulted
                   in a lot more harm as a whole to african americans
                   then indentured irish potato farmers.  Before you blow
                   a gasket I don't support reperations, in my little
                   Berkeley bubble and on campus the subject doesn't come up.
                   I don't think it's a subject that gets a lot of
                   discussion in the bay area but maybe I don't listen
                   to KSFO enough. - danh
                   \_ danh, stop using vi to edit the motd.  you overwrote my
                      post below in posting your material above.
                      \_ sign your fucking posts. --me-user
              \_ lol.  There are so many _reliable_ sources discussing the
                 cruelty and inhumanity of indentured servitude that we do not
                 _need_ to rely on the rantings of one crackpot with an
                 anti-reparations agenda.  Just because a broken (analog)
                 clock is right twice a day, we need not assume that it is
                 correct in any other way.  So, yes, indentured servitude did
                 happen and did affect thousands of whites in Colonial and
                 Victorian America.  Let them file their own claim to
                 reparations from the UK.  This in no way "makes right" the
                 West African slave trade or the subsequent harm it caused to
                 African Americans.
                 \_ This has nothing to do with reparations.  We were talking
                    about whether or not what the guy's book said happened
                    really did or not.  I'm glad to see you agree with the
                    author because it's true and you'd look silly to disagree
                    on this point.  Some tangent about reparations for blacks
                    has nothing to do with anything.  It is perfectly ok to
                    talk about bad thing X happening to people X(1) without
                    diminishing bad thing Y done to people Y(1).  It isn't even
                    necessary to mention Y or Y(1).  Different topic.
                        \_ Just a dumb question, why should I be held
                           accountable financially for what my ancestors may
                           or may not have done 200 years ago?  -John
                           \_ how about you are held accountable for any
                              wealth you inherited that was created by
                              the actions your ancestors may or may not have
                              done 200 years ago.
                                \_ Erm, I'm not.  Nobody is.  -John
                   \_ What hogwash. If you want to assert that there was such
                      a thing as indentured servitude, point us to an
                      encyclopedia.  No one disputes this.  What is being
                      disputed is the authenticity of the source as anything
                      but a white-power propagandist.  Hell, if I write a
                      book in which I assert on the one hand that the freezing
                      point of water is zero degrees celsius and that the Earth
                      is hollow and populated with the armies of the Gnomes of
                      Zurich on the other, you're still free (and damn near
                      obliged) to point out that I'm a kook.
                      \_ That's silly!  Everyone knows the Gnomes of Zurich
                         live with John, under the mountain.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2003:September:21 Sunday <Saturday, Monday>