Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2003:December:06 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2003/12/6-7 [Recreation/Dating] UID:11333 Activity:nil
12/5    Buy yourself an imaginary gf for chirstmas:
        http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2969906214&category=317
        \_ if you have one imaginary girlfriend and one real girlfriend
           your sex life will be complex. get it, imaginary and real-complex!
           \_ i!
           \_ | 1+i | = sqrt(2)
              \_ So this is irrational as well?
        \_ I'm just curious how this one was found.
           \_ I was looking for a girlfriend on ebay.
           \_ I saw it in this thread:
              http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=191663
              I'm not sure I want to know why the original poster
              found it.
2003/12/6-7 [Transportation/Airplane] UID:11334 Activity:nil
12/5    How does an airplane know its true speed instead of air speed?  Thanks.
        \_ African or European?  -John
        \_ radar, possibly GPS
                \_ oh yeah, you can get heading/speed via radar if you're
                   on IFR or on VRF flight following. -csua pilot
        \_ http://www.csgnetwork.com/tasinfocalc.html
           \_ That computes true air speed, not ground speed. -geordan
        \_ what exactly is the difference between the two?
           \_ If you're flying at an air speed of 300MPH eastward in some wind
              whose speed is 50MPH westward, your true speed is only 250MPH.
              \_ but i get screwed in physics question when they think
                 the instrument panel shows true speed. :(
        \_ there is the true airspeed, indicated airspeed, and ground speed.
           You get true airspeed by taking in account of indicated airspeed
           and the environment (temperature, humidity, etc), and the know
           calibrated errors from the airspeed indicator (indicated airspeed).
           Then you get the approximate wind speed from ATIS, tower, or
           other reliable source, recalibrate it (since wind speed is always
           true north whereas your heading indicator is always magnetic
           north). From those variables you can get a pretty precise ground
           speed. However, GPS makes it a lot easier.   -csua pilot who
                quit being a programmer and is now flying turboprops in
                the midwest
                \- csua pilot: what are those sign like A45 R16 etc you
                   see by the side of runways at commercial airports.
                   i think they sometimes have arrows on them.
                   \_ A45? Don't think that exists. Suppose you see A16.
                      It means you're at the approach end of runway 16 and
                      that you better hold short of runway till clearance
                      from ground. A15-33 means you're approaching runway
                      15-33. Runway numbers are aligned to the magnet north
                      rounded up/down and the last digit is omitted. For
                      example, 15-33 means runway 15x-33x (same runway).
                      Say 33x is 330, then it is aligned 330 degrees and
                      330-180 (150) degrees. All of this information is
                      readily availabe on the annual publication of FAR/AIM
                      which is easily accessible even at Borders/B&N. If
                      you're really curious, go to your local flying club
                      and fly a plane for once! It'll be the most exhilirating
                      $50 you'll ever spend in your life. http://www.beapilot.com
                      \- oh ok good. yeah i was guessing it has something to do
                         bearings, but was wondering why i didnt see larger
                         numbers. now why in large planes, do they open the
                         window shades for landing [so passengers arnt
                         disquieted?] and turn the cabin lights on/off
                         during takeoff/landings.
                         \_ in the old days (and when you're training as a
                            a pilot), you turn off all the non-essential
                            power-hogs so that during take off you don't
                            overload the circuitry and blow off fuses. This
                            procedure has been passed down for historical
                            reasons and we [airlines] still do it just
                            because it works. As for the shades, it's just
                            to shut the damn passengers         -csua pilot
                                \_ actually there have been cases where the
                                   passenger notices something wrong with the
                                   wing or the fuselage (which is not caught
                                   in the sensors). But like I said all the
                                   non-essential stuff is secondary to
                                   flying.
                                   \_ yeah, like the time the passenger saw
                                      that little monster on the wing and he
                                      was tearing apart the wing and no one
                                      would believe him
                                      \_ yeah!! where was that??
                                         \_ I think it was an X-Files episode.
                                            \_ Maybe, but it was definitely a
                                               Twilight Zone episode.
                                               \_ Episode with William
                                                  Shatner; in the movie with
                                                  John Lithgow.
2003/12/6 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:11335 Activity:nil
12/5    Santorum: That frothy mix of lube and fecal matter that is
        sometimes the byproduct of anal sex.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savage_Love
        \_ Somehow I'd expect no less.  Charming.  The irony is he is
           right.  Polygamists and pedophiles have already invoked
           Lawrence.  Are you a member of NAMBLA?
           \_ url?
              \_ He can't give you an URL, because he's a lying troll.
              \_ link:csua.org/u/55w
                 For the polygamy claim.  Haven't seen one for pedophilia, but
                 you can expect it.
                 \_ ZEDO is an add server.  I can't get this link.  could
                    someone provide a text version?  thanks.
        \_ awesome. the term finally found a meaning!
        \_ Umm, I don't really see what Dan (funny fucker btw) was upset about.
           I didn't see the original article but in the quote given at the wiki
           there is no mention of pedophelia.  Obviously Lawrence can not be
           effectively used vis-a-vis pedo.  But why not polygamy?  Who here
           thinks polygamy is a LESS valid form of marriage than gay marriage?
           Anyone?  Of course it's not.  People (consentingable) should be able
           to enter into any kind of "marriage" contract they like and the
           gubmnt should respect it. -phuqm
           \_ no one's stopping you from living with a bunch of chicks and
              calling them your wives, as long as they don't mind. the
              government doesn't have to legally recognize them as your
              wives though. maybe i'd like to call you my bitch, but the
              government doesn't have to recognize that either. at least
              theoretically, what the majority decides is valid is what
              will, eventually, come to pass in this country.
                \_ I was a bit confused.  This is about sodomy not gay marriage
                   That being said, I still don't see what Dan was upset about
                   Do you think that the courts SHOULD allow laws agin' incest
                   but not against sodomy?  Clearly they shouldn't.  Clearly
                   incest and sodomy are equally repugnant to some and there is
                   no reasonable basis on which to say one is worse than the
                   other. Or that only one should be prohibitable by law -phuqm
                   \_ phuqm is my hero. Can I sodomize you, phuqm?
                        --phuqm #1 fan
                       \_ If you were REALLY my #1 fan you would ask if you
                          could by sodomized BY me.  Still, i've been waiting
                          to have someone sign a post this way, and the bright
                          sunshiney day has finally arrived. -phuqm
                   as for the generally accepted "coming to pass".  That may be
                   true but far from optimal. One generation has been taught
                   that it's ok to be gay and says "o.k. same sex marriages are
                   ok, but you guys and your polygamy that's just perverse.
                   We're not standing for that."  Is this reasonable?  I'm
                   really curious to know what you CSUAers think.  Poll Time:
                   (poll moved to top).
        \_  "State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest,
            prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality,
            and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers'
            validation of laws based on moral choices." -Antonin Scalia
            There are laws against masturbation? Wow, some CSUAers are
            really hardcore criminals then, I guess.
             \_ right, so Scalia and I basically agree (It is amazing how
                it is in the disscenting opinions of the
                supreme court where reason is most likely to be found):
                Either legislators have the right to enforce their own
                moral code in regards to sex between consenting adults or
                they don't (I exclude bestiality, being an animal rights
                nut).  Though Scalia abhors this decision and I applaud
                it.  (From a "this is the way *I* think it should be
                libertarian view, not a legal one, which i haven't
                considered in this case.) -phuqm

                   gay marriages are ok by not polygamy:
                   create whatever wacky marriage you want: .
                   (assuming consenting adults)
                   man-woman is the only marriage gov should recognize:
2003/12/6 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:11336 Activity:low
12/5    Prohibition Repealed 70 years ago today.  Celebrate.
        http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/1205.html
        \_ FDR " improved the occasion to address a plea to the American people
         to employ their regained liberty first of all for national manliness."
        \_What are "Recovery Taxes" ?
2003/12/6 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:11337 Activity:nil
12/5    http://sandiegozoo.org/videos/indexpanda.html
        Pandas are such cute animals!  Check out the videos of the little
        one. :-)
2003/12/6 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:11338 Activity:nil
12/5    Anyone know of something like dummynet for Win2000/XP?  I've found
        a windows version of iptables, but all it allows is accept/deny.  I
        need something that I can use for traffic shaping.  Alternately, is
        there a reasonably cheap router that has good traffic shaping?
        \_ yermom is reasonably cheap, and accepts all shaped traffic,
           windows or no
           \_ Yeah, but I heard yermom was full-up till next month...
2003/12/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Gay] UID:11339 Activity:high
12/5    YAMP:

        gay marriages are ok by not polygamy:
        create whatever wacky marriage you want: ...
        (assuming consenting adults)
        man-woman is the only marriage gov should recognize:
        polygomy is ok but not gay marriages: .
        \_ For phuqm:
           You're right, on the face of it, polygamy and incest are not acts
           against which a blanket law would take into account all of the
           circumstances surrounding any any given situation.  Unfortunately,
           we lack the means of divining whether a relation continues due to
           active, participatory consent or because of undue influence
           exerted by one of the individuals.  In effect, we lack a law
           against emotional blackmail and psychic domination.  Current
           incest laws seek to provide legal recourse to individuals who may
           otherwise be kept in relationships against their will because of
           the inherent authority some family members wield over other family
           members.  Current polygamy laws are a reflection of the growth of
           women's rights, a set of rights that are often denigrated or
           diminished in a traditional polygamous relationship; the goal is
           to provide a legal means of protecting people who may not
           understand that they have the right to be other than barefoot and
           pregnant and in the kitchen.  What about the rights of the
           individual?  In incest, if an adult and fully consenting brother
           and sister really love each other _that_ much, they could maintain
           their relationship with little fear of public persecution provided
           that they exercise a modicum of discretion.  How many people have
           been prosecuted for consensual adult incest?  (Don't bother
           mentioning Lord Byron; we're talking modern.)  As for polygamy,
           well, as has been mentioned here, as long as you don't obtain a
           marriage license for each of your marriages, it's not a crime to
           simply cohabitate.
           \_ But those who cohabitate with you would not qualify for domestic
              partners benefits...
           \_ http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/WeirdNews/2003/04/03/57389-ap.html
        \_ phuqm, is this you?
           http://www.museworld.com/archives/2003_06.html#001027
2003/12/6-7 [Reference/BayArea] UID:11340 Activity:low
12/6    Boston protests >> SF protests
        http://graphics.csail.mit.edu/~fredo/Photos/Manif/116_1632.JPG
        \_ Many ugle people in that photo.
2003/12/6-7 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll] UID:11341 Activity:low
12/6    csua pilot, why did you quit your cushy high paying job in Silicon
        Valley? Are you stupid or something?
        \_ your and idiot.
        \_ troll quality has gone down as of late.
           \_ Sorry, I have been away from the Internet for a class.
              I will try to make up for it next week. -#1 Troll
2003/12/6-7 [Politics/Domestic, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:11342 Activity:nil
12/6    If you're reading this, you have internet access, free time, and
        and interest in politics--time to turn on cspan and listen to the
        democratic candidates. http://www.cspan.org
        \_ "Why should I waste my beautiful mind on things like that."
           Barbara Bush
2003/12/6 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:29693 Activity:nil
12/5    Why does everybody care about Finland?  What happened to Africa,
        Israel, Sunni/Shiite/Kurd debates?
        \_ motd darwinism: who's going to delete a finland thread?
           it's all the censors have left us with.
        \_ Too troolish.
2017/09/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/24    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2003:December:06 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>