| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2003/10/14 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:10618 Activity:high |
10/13 The Soviet Republic of Texas
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21839-2003Oct13.html
\_ Well, all the partisan posturing aside, what is the right way
to create districts? -- ilyas
\_ Don't let politicians do it.
\_ yep.
\_ This is avoiding the question. The article implied that
high reelection rates are somehow bad, equating high turnover
with healthy democracy. It's not clear that this is right.
While low turnover may be indicative of lack of
While low turnover may be indicated of lack of
democracy, like in Soviet Union, it may also be indicative
of voter satisfaction. Also, assuming a particular state
has a definite political majority, does it not seem fair
to district in such a way as to reflect this? (Not to say
Texas is necessarily such a state). The writer of the
article clearly didn't like Texan redistricting, but failed
to point out a standard to which districting should adhere.
It's easy to be a critic.
\_ It depends on why there are high reelection rates. In the
case of highly gerrymandered states like Ca and soon to be
Texas, it is because the minority party voters are being
disenfranchised. Their candidates *can't* win because
the lines are drawn to guarantee this.
\_ Fair enough-- it's also easy to go along with the
rowdies when they kvetch and scream loudly. Ignoring
the article for a moment, the correct way to create
districts is the way it was originally intended: by
population numbers, not politics. Each state has a
number of Representatives based on its population;
create districts to reflect that and let the voters
decide themselves on the person they want to elect.
When compared with a fair and balanced plan like this,
DeLay's plan to redistrict along voting lines is
exposed as the naked power-grab that it is.
\_ You are pointing out features of districting that
any districting plan whatsoever has. 'Letting the
voters decide' sounds great in theory, but how do you
actually draw the lines? In each geographic area, there
are political minorities and majorities. How is
districting to be done?
\_ Start at the border. Draw a modified rectangle
that incorporates the shape of the border. Make
the rectangle large enough to incorporate a
fraction of the population that reflects the
population of the state divided by the number
representatives allowed. Add more rectangles
until you've run out of districts. Adjust
rectangles to equally absorb segments of population
not incorporated into existing rectangles.
\_ What if political affiliations are geographically
segregated? (Not a very farfetched assumption,
btw).
\_ As long as you pick an arbitrary (random,
perhaps?) corner to begin with, you'll have
at least taken a stab at fairness. If the
end result is a corner where one party or
the other holds significant sway, then so
be it. Vox populi, and all that.
\_ The problem with this is people aren't equally
spread throughout the state or even counties.
We already have county lines. We should use
those. Larger counties elect more people, while
the least populated elect the minimum of 1.
\_ First, counties are geographical, not
population-based, so there's no even
distribution whatsoever there. Second,
how do you determine who gets sent from a
county? By divvying up the county into
smaller districts? You'll get a great
picture of each district, but you'll lose
your view of the state as a whole.
\_ But these are supposed to be local reps to
the state level government. I don't see
anything wrong with my local rep to the
state being representative of who I am and
what my local concerns are. If my local
rep doesn't represent me, who does? Why
did I vote for them? Part of the reason
so few vote is the feeling of disconnect
between the people we vote for and what
\_ 1) Local rep is a misnomer: your local
rep represents your district, not
your immediate locale. 2) If your
district rep doesn't represent you or
fails to represent you after being
elected, campaign to have him/her
recalled or ejected at the next
election. If you can convince the
majority of your peers, you'll be on
your way.
It's easy to be a critic.
they do afterwards.
\_ PLEASE! Come to Cali, where re-districting the opposite way gets
no attention. Use your head - Cali - massive gun restrictions -
liberal bastion, Texas - exposed gun permitted - the opposite.
\_ What the hell are you trying to say?
\_ The problem with politicians creating districts is that over the
years, the majority party will create districts such that the
minority party becomes the zero party. Texas Republicans are
following in the footsteps of California Democrats on this one.
Republicans make roughly 40% of CA voters but have zero state wide
posts and a continously shrinking number of local ones. The
majority party in every state always uses redistricting to punish
the minority party and provide guaranteed lockin of their own for
future elections. You can't allow politicians to draw the lines.
The really sickeningly gerrymandered stuff eventually ends up in
front of a judge but only after decades of abuse. The mildly
sick stuff never goes to court.
\_ The problem with your theory is that the California Republicans
agreed with the redistricting of CA in 2000 and supported it.
It passed 65-8. Only 8 voted against it.
\_ No, that only confirms it. They needed a few votes to pass
and created enough majority Republican districts to keep
those few folks in power. Everyone else gets screwed. The
district lines should not be a political issue. It's too
important to trust to the people most affected by it.
\_ Right symptoms, wrong problem. Gerrymandering creates districts
which can easily be labelled Republican or Democratic. So each
representative is less likely to vote counter to his party lest
draw the ire of the local voters, thus creating more gridlock.
\_ I cover this in my reply above. Yes, some in the minority
liberal bastion, Texas - exposed gun permitted - the opposite.
party will vote to save their own ass. They'll get burned
later. |
| 2003/10/14 [Consumer/Camera] UID:10619 Activity:nil |
10/13 http://au.news.yahoo.com/031013/19/m1ue.html speaks for itself on why there's still no peace and no hope of peace in the middle east. |
| 2003/10/14 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:10620 Activity:nil |
10/13 Cool. Here's Europe forgetting lessons of the very recent past:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/10/14/weu14.xml&sSheet=/news/2003/10/14/ixworld.html
The best parts are near the end when they talk about arms transfers.
\_ Which lessons are those? That China is a good trading partner?
Amazing how antagonizing your allies makes them look for other
partners, isn't it? The damage Bush has done to American diplomacy
will take decades to undo.
\_ The ones about peace with honor. Or in this case, cash without
honor. But you knew that. China is a great trading partner if
you've got high tech weaponry to sell. You seem angry.
\_ Honor?
\_ What are you trying to say? That it is dishonorable to
trade with the Chinese? That China is a threat to Europe's
security? What???
\_ It's there. No. Yes. Just that. |
| 2003/10/14 [Uncategorized/Multicategory] UID:10621 Activity:nil |
10/13 "Our armies do not come into your cities and lands as conquerors
or enemies but as liberators..."
General Stanley Maude, commander of the British forces,
Baghdad, 1917
Sound familiar?
\_ The Brits kicked the Turkish out of Iraq, right?
\_ How long did the Brits stay?
\_ Until they lost the title of World Power.
\_ They were smart in pulling out at the right time,
unlike the French in Indochina and Algeria.
\_ Or the US in Vietnam or the USSR in Afghanistan.
\_ The Brits were smart. The got a mandate from the League of
Nations. Masters of diplomacy, in addition to military
and economic might.
\_ League of Nations? HAHAHAHHAHAHAAA!! They all cared even
less about the LoN then we do today about the UN. There's
a reason it's gone and didn't last very long. It was a
gentlemen's club with no gentlemen in it.
\_ I think you're confusing this with that Sean Connery
movie. |
| 2003/10/14 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:10622 Activity:nil |
10/13 http://www.iht.com/articles/113629.html is the first step to the US finally bringing our troops home and letting the EU pay for their own defense. \_ you mean redeploy our troops to other third world countries. \_ how fucking long ago was it that the whole fucking world was united behind the US in goodwill and military support after 9/11? Now we have the most precarious split of NATO since its inception. Great fucking foreign relations, W. \_ Goodwill doesn't keep your citizens safe, capture or stop foreign terrorists, shutdown terrorist training bases or really do much else for us. Once we started trying to cash in that goodwill it dried up really god damned fast. It was just foreign PR. It's easy to say, "oh! the world's greatest super power just took a civilian hit, let's send a nice note!" thats what diplomats do. \_ It's unclear it's W's fault. The whole world may have been united behind the US, but as soon as the US started flexing a little muscle, various countries started noticing it wasn't in their best interest. Go figure, the world is ruled by self-interest. The US only had support while it did nothing, and it could no longer afford to do nothing. \_ That's right, the Iraqis had nukes headed our way! \_ A little diplomacy can go a long way. Look how Bush I got the whole world to line up behind him for Gulf War I. \_ Only in name and tokens. It was an American action as always. \_ Other countries backed us up when we invaded Afghanistan. They objected when we invaded a country that did not support al Qaeda. \_ Bush and the neocons are right. Everyone else in the whole wide world is crazy. Just ask them. \_ We've seen links here claiming otherwise. Unless you're in the intelligence agencies assigned to an anti-terror unit, you can't know either way what links there may or may not have been. \_ Then you're on the same page as Dick Cheney ... This article argues against that: http://www.hillnews.com/marshall/091703.aspx \_ NATO was enough for Serbia. NATO was enough for the first gulf-war. The French and Germans, and now Britain are saying NATO is not enough.... hmmm... I wonder why ?? \_ Because after the Soviets fell to Ronald Reagan they're no longer afraid. We killed the big bad wolf for them so it's now safe for them to march around heads held high saying they don't need us anymore. They're right for the present but they'll be sorry in about 20 years and come begging for help again and again we'll do it. Not sure why. We're just stupid like that I guess. \_ So true... \_ uh huh. Everyone knows the Soviets fell to Ronald Reagan between the Serbian conflict and the recent Iraqi war. |
| 2003/10/14 [Transportation/Car, Transportation/Car/RoadHogs] UID:10623 Activity:nil |
10/13 So various no skilled and low skilled workers are striking across
the US right now. Should they be replaced by illegal immigrants?
Is this not a case of Americans being unwilling to do menial work
that immigrants would gladly do?
\_ sounds like a normal negotiation process. And who said that
Americans are unwilling to do menial type of work? Everything
has its price.
\_ Or is it the case of trying to maintain the standard of living
so we don't have to live like they do in the 3rd world?
\_ But they're mostly doing unskilled or very low skilled labor so
wouldn't it be better to have undocumented immigrants do this
labor for less since Americans aren't willing to work at the
lower rates the new immigrants are willing to work for? Isn't
that the same reasoning for having undocumented workers in the
fields picking produce instead of higher waged Americans?
\_ You know, not every job has to, or can, provide health insurance
and high pay. People accepting positions like these ones need to
realize that upon accepting them.
\_ Every job should provide health insurance. Maybe not 100% paid
for, but the employer should contribute. That might mean less
pay, though. As for high pay, do you think these people are
highly paid? Maybe $17/hour is a little much for a checker,
but: 1) What is the right amount? 2) The grocery stores agreed
to it. --dim
\_ "They agreed to do it." Ya, the alternative is to let
people strike. Then you look bad and the federal govt might
slap your wwrist.
\_ actually they didn't agree to it, that's why the
clerks are striking.
\_ Actually, they did. That's why the clerks make what
they make. Now they want to put the genie back in
the bottle. They have that right, but the reason
clerks are overpaid is that they agreed to do it.
\_ The pay, not the healthcare costs.
\_ Um, no. Health insurance as we know it needs to be
completely dismantled. My car insurance doesn't pay for my
oil changes--why should my health insurance pay for doctor
visits?
\_ It's not the doctor visits bankrupting the system. They
are cheap, and cheaper still when you consider that an
ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
\_ The two are not comparable, in my view. Car insurance
pays if you break someone else's car, not if your car
needs a valve job. -chialea
\_ That's what he just said, isn't it?
\_ And thus any comparison between the two is not
on, get it? My driver's license doesn't allow
me to take cars, so why should my fishing license
allow me to take fish?
\_ Uh, I think we're in agreement but you lost me
when you started talking about fish.
\_ Just this: comparing car insurance with
health insurance makes as much sense as
comparing driver's licenses with fishing
licenses.
\_ health >> driving around in your SUV.
\_ whats up with the class warfare? he could be driving
a bug from the 60s for all you know. |
| 2003/10/14 [Transportation/Motorcycle] UID:10624 Activity:nil |
10/13 Bike dudes, I went on my motorcycle and at around 70MPH turned my
wheels. When I turn right, I swerve to the left, and when I turn
left, I swerve to the right. In another word, I turn OPPOSITE
to where I turn the handle. I didn't die.
\_ Miss America 2000, we are once again in need of your services!
\_ If the hag on the bike had followed the rules of the road she
would still be alive today.
\_ And what was she driving when she killed that cyclist?
You guessed it, an SUV. A Lincoln Navigator, to be exact.
\_ looked on Google, can't find anything, hence your story
is fake.
\_ this is called countersteering. You do it so that you have enough
momentum to lean into the turn so that when you turn you don't
tip over in the opposite direction from the centrifugal force.
\_ My biker physics TA told the class about it too, but I didn't
understand his explanation. |
| 2003/10/14 [Uncategorized] UID:10625 Activity:nil |
10/13 Are Purespin wedges decent to use on the course? Or should I get
better ones like Titleist or Callaway? Thanks.
\_ Just run over it with your SUV. |
| 2003/10/14-15 [Uncategorized] UID:10626 Activity:nil |
10/14 Where's a place online to check for existing lawsuits? All I have
are names...
\_ a specific court or you want to find out if your ex-gf is
getting divorced in some unknown state? |
| 2003/10/14-15 [Uncategorized] UID:10627 Activity:high |
10/14 magnae clunes mihi placent, nec possum de hac re mentiri.
quis enim, consortes mei, non fateatur,
cum puella incedit minore medio corpore
sub quo manifestus globus, inflammare animos
virtute praestare ut velitis, notantes bracas eius
\_ J'aime de grands bouts.
\_ "I like big butts"
\_ that's a first
\_ I love this. On one hand critical of my broken English,
on the other hand, endorce some European language. White man's
culture superiority at its best.
\_ wtf are you talking about? i can't even read that, and i bet
most people on here aren't fluent enough in whatever language
that is to comment on it. why don't you go love yourself
long time
\_ Can't you people recognize latin when you see it?
\_ nope. shalom.
\_ Hence, White Man's cultural superority. |
| 2003/10/14-15 [Academia/Berkeley/Classes, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll] UID:10628 Activity:high |
10/14 Dammit, why did I waste all that time getting a BA from Berkeley when
I could have just bought a fake degree?
http://www.hep.uiuc.edu/home/g-gollin/diploma_mills.pdf
\_ I ask myself that a lot. With minimum gpa requirements enforced
by some HR bimbo, I would've been better off with a 4.0 from
Hayward than my 3.0 from Berkeley.
\_ If you think a college degree is mostly about your
marketability, you definitely made a poor choice coming to
Berkeley. -tom
\_ Where's your degree from? No, I didn't come to Berkeley with
marketability in mind. It was the best school in the state
without paying in blood.
\_ so there's some advantage to going to the best school
in the state, other than marketability? -tom
\_ where's your degree from? yes, when you're 16 or 17
and don't know what you want to do with your life you
apply to everything you think you can get into and a few
above that and take the best you can afford. is there
something odd about what i did? btw, where's your
degree from?
\_ He doesn't have a degree. He is a dropout.
\_ do you suffer from MPD or something? there are obvious
advantages, like access to presumably more knowledgeable
faculty, meeting smarter people, perhaps having a
chance to learn more, etc.
\_ the point I am making is that the reason to come
to a top liberal arts institution has nothing to
do with being able to get a better job later. It
has to do with *learning*. If you just want a
better job, go to DeVry. -tom
\_ and if you have half a brain you can learn those
things by going to a second rate liberal arts
school or just reading on your own.
the real advantage of a top school is who
you meet there.
\_ I partied with Nick Weaver!
\_ It probably is true that it's harder for
someone with 3.0 from Berkeley to get a job
right out of college than someone with 4.0
from Hayward. I remembered both Intel and
AT&T turned me down because I didn't make the
GPA cut-off point. But after you have worked
for a while, it really doesn't matter anymore.
\_ You don't want to work for places too dumb gather
that a 3.0 from Berkeley EECS is more impressive
than a 4.0 from Cal State San Bernardino CS.
\_ the original poster is too dumb to gather
that a degree from Berkeley is more
useful than one from a diploma mill, so
maybe he'd prefer this kind of organization
\_ And you're too dense to be able to
discern sarcasm without smilies or other
stupid indicators. --OP
\_ sorry I meant followup #1, not OP
\_ Best payoff from that PDF is when he googles all the people
claiming to have degrees from the "universities" in question,
and finds a bunch of college professors, teachers, and clinical
workers.
\_ It gets better when he follows up on a forensic psychologist
with a PhD from Ashford University. |
| 2003/10/14-15 [Computer/HW/Display] UID:10629 Activity:high |
10/13 I want to know if graphics cards X can be installed in my box at
work. The manufacturer offers my model with an optional GeForceFX
5200 but nothing better. Is there a way, short of tiral and error
to know if a given graphics card (say, a Radeon 9800) will fit given
that I can see that the above card will fit? -- ulysses
\_ Get physical specs on the exact card you're going to get. They
vary slightly by vendor. Then simply measure free space in your
case. Also, that 9800 requires an extra power plug so you'll
need a decent power supply too if you're already loaded up with
ram, drives, and a honking cpu. Do you have some dinky case?
If not, I'd expect it to fit in most standard cases.
\_ The case will fit a 2.5"x6.6" card in its AGP4X slot. I have
not been able to find size specs for most cards via google and
manufacturer websites beyond mention that the newer cards are
"big" because of their cooling systems.
\_ Try http://tomshardware.com. They often mention sizes. Or some of
the other hardware sites, anandtech, hardocp, etc.
\_ It's a Dell minitower case. |
| 2003/10/14 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:29573 Activity:nil |
10/13 Democrats say Iraq has WMD
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1000604/posts
\_ Have you even read the quotes?? Try harder, if you're going
to troll. At least come up with something substantial. |
| 3/15 |