3/10    On yesterday's motd regards to people who are tinkering about
        seeking opportunties in mainland China / Taiwan, let's talk more.
                        --kngharv

3/10    Teach yourself programming in 10 years:
        http://norvig.com/21-days.html
        \_ "Learn at least a half dozen programming languages"
           Why? What is the point of knowing a bunch of languages
           when the only language that is of any real use is C?
           \_ Assuming this is not a troll I'll just throw in that I know
              more than a couple of people who have been slow to get re-
              absorbed into the employment pool because they could not claim
              to be experienced and proficient in more than one language. As
              an outside observer, it really looked to me like they should have
              been augmenting C with Java or J2EE with C++ and so on...
               -- not a cs professional
           \_ Did you study CS at Berkeley?  If you want to get any
              real work done, you ought to use high-level languages.
                \_ if you want any real job you need to know more than 1 lang.
                \_ I didn't study CS (I was an eng.) I'm not sure
                   what you characterize as real work, but I've
                   worked on device drivers, custom embedded
                   oses and encryption protocols; all in C.
                   \_ "Hydrological _and_ hydrodynamical!  Talk about
                   \_ "Hydrological _and_ hydroelectrical!  Talk about
                      running the gamut." -- ilyas (though the credit has to
                      go to Sideshow Bob)
                      \_ The first mention of my profession on the motd,
                         ever! Well, actually I kind of gave up on hydrology.
                         -- ulysses
           \_ Because really learning another language means learning what
              its strengths are and understanding why those are strengths.
           \_ It's better to learn new languages naturally as the need arises.
           \_ I don't know why I bought all those tools when the only
              \_ BAM!
              tool of any real use is the hammer.

3/10    This is a bit obscure but hey who knows?  I'm trying to get an old
        dual p3 compaq-based 'serverworks' machine to run winxp.  The only
        problem is the serverwork's agp bridge doesn't work.  xp says it
        can't find enough resources for this which is something I've never
        seen before.  I tried turning off a few other devices, disabling the
        onboard vga and other bios stuff to no avail.  Anyone ever seen
        anything like this or have any other suggestions or tips?  Thanks!
        \_ commercial OS -> commercial support. Give M$ and/or compaq a call.
           It is legitimately licensed, right?

3/10    How is soda data backed up?
        \_ I hope you don't keep anything here that you don't have your own
           copy of somewhere else.  Unless you don't care about it.
        \_ it used to be mirrored to a disk array in another room in soda,
           using rsync.  However, I can't get to my backup, so I don't know
           if it is actually working.

3/10    My new Beretta filter is outputing black water, not just a few
        black particles.  The only unusual thing I did with it was shaking
        it.  Did I break it and let loose some ink/pocket of extra fine
        charcoal or was it defective to begin with?
        \_ You mean Britta?  Baretta is a gun maker.
        \_ If it did that before you shook it, it's defective.  If it started
           after shaking, I'd guess you broke the charcoal.  Either way you can
           probably return it as defective if there's any doubt.
        \_ dumb question, but did you remember to soak it first?

3/10    Some military families rethink war against Iraq
        http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4501347
        \_ Shall I respond for the Bush loyalists with "Why do you hate
           America?" and "Why do you support the terrorists?"
           \_ No, we can speak for ourselves without your knee jerk
              thoughtlessness and pointless insults, thanks.
        \_ So?  How many urls do you want to see where military families are
           quoted saying the opposite?  In a large enough group of people you
           can find 'some' people who believe or will say anything.  Why are
           you wasting bits?
           \_ The article also mentions the contrary view is the majority
              one for military families.  You're so smart, obviously; but
              let others read for themselves as well.  It was meaningful to
              me, hence it wasn't wasting bits; likewise, I think others
              may find the same.  After all, in a large enough group of
              people, can't we find "some" people who would appreciate it?
              \_ The motd isn't that large but I'll grant statistical anomaly.
              \_ Then the headline is misleading.

3/11    Will the End of Oil Mean the End of America?
        http://csua.org/u/6eb
        \_ My question is, when will american companies/government actually
           start putting money into R&D again.  I heard an imbalanced metaphor
           the other day: "The Stone Age didn't end because we ran out of
           stones" with the corrolary that we won't stop using oil because we
           run out.  I think, there are changes in the approach to the market
           that make this comparison ring false.  There is no market pressure
           to actually make a shift (i.e. competition -- warring tribes and
           the need for better tools/weapons).  We _will_ have a problem
           sometime, and it's imprudent not to invest in research.  Hell, look
           at Ford licensing Toyota hybrid tech.  We've gotten lazy, research-
           wise.  --scotsman
           \_ Drilling and burning oil is the easiest and cheapest way of using
              energy on a grand scale right now.  When that runs out, we will
              have to switch to something else.  However, since it is such a
              huge part of the overall energy picture, the costs/pain
              associated with switching may be unbearable.  And don't bring up
              the whale oil argument -- at that time industrial production and
              world population was a fraction of what it is today.
        \_ My question is, will the fact that "The sky is falling"
           eco-nuts have been completely wrong on every single prediction
           they've ever made ever stop anyone from listening to them?
           \_ How about the fact that the "eco-nuts" writing this stuff are
              now petroleum scientists?
           \_ google "world fish population"
           \_ More nuts: http://csua.org/u/6ea
           \_ You know, the Earth has been getting hotter the past 100 years...
              \_ So has yermom.
                 \_ obObligatory.
              \_ You know, the global tempeture has been fluctuating for
                 umpteen billion years.  Not to meantion, in the 70's
                 the prediction was "Global Cooling!" "New ice age!"  Heck
                 that was the prediction in 1998 when the global temp
                 data came in and they suddely the realized the global
                 temp had actually fallen over the last 10 years....
                 \_ I love how the conservative wingnuts keep trotting out
                    one study from 30 years ago as "proof" that currently
                    accepted and peer-reviewed climate models are
                    inaccurate.  And you know, the Earth probably doesn't
                    revolve around the Sun, because those scientists used to
                    say that it was the other way around!  -tom
                        \_ I'd like to hear your response to this:
                           Corrections to the Mann et al (1998) Proxy Data
                           Base and Northern Hemisphere Average
                           Temperature Series
                           http://www.uoguelph.ca/~rmckitri/research/trc.html
                           \_ My response is that you can find a scientist
                              to say anything, including that AIDS doesn't
                              exist and the Holocaust didn't happen.  I am
                              not a climatologist and am not qualified to
                              evaluate the discrepancies between the two
                              papers: however, you yourself can read the
                              rebuttal by the original paper's authors.
                              This is what the peer review process is about.
                              It is a common tactic of those with an agenda
                              to publicize the papers of scientists on one
                              side of the debate, even when those papers
                              have been discredited or did not pass formal
                              review.  And even if McIntyre's objection is
                              correct, his revision still shows a spike of
                              0.5 degrees since 1900.  -tom
                              \_ If "formal review" and acceptance by the
                                 "scientific community" were the be-all end-all
                                 of debate then the planet would still be flat,
                                 dragons would still be flying, mice would
                                 still emerge fully grown from old rags and
                                 rotted seeds and the sun would revolve around
                                 the Earth.
                                \_ So basically you have no reply,  you take
                                   other's 'science' at face value when they
                                   clearly have an agenda.  It's not just one
                                   scientist but hundreds if not thousands...
                                   One can say CO2 levels have risen in the
                                   20th century and maybe 0.5 a degree over
                                   the century, most during the first half.
                                   That is all there appears to be concensus
                                   on.  The rest is all rhetoric to raise
                                   grant money.
                                   \_ What is your reply to Mann's rebuttal?
                                      Or should I just check the blogs on
                                      http://freerepublic.com?  -tom
                                        \_ If you read their initial response
                                           from Oct. 29 2003 Mann's behavior
                                           is very suspicious:
                                           link:csua.org/u/6eh
                                           Later, they also give a more detailed
                                           description of the same run-around.
                                           Don't you agree that for such an important
                                           study the data sets / programs
                                           should be readily accessible
                                           for verification?
                                           \_ no, it's tom.  you're wasting
                                              your time.  there's no point in
                                              discussing any of his hot button
                                              issues or really much of anything
                                              else with him.  he's always right
                                              you're always wrong and you get
                                              a dose of childish insults to go
                                              with it.  please just ignore him.
                                              he doesn't even see that he's the
                                              ultimate troll because it comes
                                              naturally to him, he isn't doing
                                              it for amusement.
                                              \_ it worked on you, twink
                                   \_ It's just tom.  Don't take it so
                                      seriously.  No one else does.
       \_ Bad argument. Oil is not a milkshake. It doesn't "suddenly" end,
           it just gets more and more expensive to extract. That higher price
           will force changes to societal change to energy policy.
          \_ But if production starts to decline and demand is going up up
          up (China, India, Brazil) WTF is going to happen to our totally
          oil-centric economy?
          \_ It's called nuclear power. Ever heard of it? We should've been
             using it and continually refining process to use it but the
             eco-terrorists were very successful in banning it.
                \_ It takes shitloads of oil to mine and refine fuel
                   for nuclear power plants.  How are you going to run your
                   Hummer on Plutonium? It takes years and years to build a
                   nuclear power plant, we would have to start building
                   dozens and dozens of them years ago to make a dent in
                   electricity production.  Only very large ships can be
                   nuclear.
                   \_ You put a battery in it.
                   \_ Actually you just use the energy to either put in a
                      battery or produce e.g. hydrogen. But you are left with
                      a bunch of extremely toxic shit that no one knows what
                      to do with, plus other dangers. Too much.
                \_ There's not very much Uranium in the world, buddy.
                   \_ says who?  Breeder reactors are already leaving us with
                      way too much toxic crap to deal with.
                      \_ According to a wikipedia article: "Uranium is
                         currently (2004) US$52/Kg ($26/lb), and has an energy
                         density per unit of mass of about a million times that
                         of oil. No shortage exists or is anticipated. If
                         land-based reserves are exhausted, seawater has enough
                         uranium to power the world's current industrial
                         civilization until the sun becomes a red giant. The
                         Japanese have an active project to extract Uranium
                         from seawater, to reduce their dependence on imports
                         for energy.
                         \_ holy shit! stop bringing numbers and facts here!
            \_ We will use Unobtainium!
               \_ No, we'll use windships. http://www.braunforpresident.us
                  \_ Hey, that's a cool site!
                     \_ I think people should read his position papers. He
                        makes a lot of logical points.
                        \_ My favorite:  "a shop vacuum is also a highly
                          effective method of eliminating the pests."
                          [insects]

3/11    I like my Yahoo! Launch station.  Just today, I got back-to-back songs
        with these lyrics:
        - "He's Sure The Boy I Love", The Crystals
        He doesn't hang diamonds round my neck,
        And all he's got's an unemployment check
        He sure ain't the boy I been dreamin' of,
        But he's sure the boy I love.
        - "Look At Your Hands", George Michael
        Na na na na na na lady look at your hands
        You got two fat children and a drunken man
        Betcha don't, betcha don't, betcha don't like your life
        Betcha don't, betcha don't, betcha don't like it

3\11    Stop censoring WW2 posts, it's actually insightful to history
        dummies like me.                        -history dummy
        \_ Sorry, the motd is not allowed to be useful unless you are
           interested in how to J00S L1NUX or do your CS homework.

3/11    Is Italian the closest language to Latin than other Romantic language?
        Isn't it weird that the once great empire has no spoken/written
        language today, but that other old languages from the old empires
        (Greek, Chinese, etc) still survive?
                \- helo you may wish to see ~psb/MOTD/LatinRomeGreece
        \_ Roman empire was a lot more multicultural than those other two...
           The various states spoke their native languages with Latin as
           a government/trade language.  Also, "Chinese" is not one language.
           Note that Korean, Vietnamese, and Japanese were all once
           written with Chinese characters!
           \_ why isn't chinese one language?  the spoken form is different
              region to region, by written is essentially the same.
              \_Chinese is one language. It just has many dialects. Also note
                that Korean, Vietnamese, and Japanese are essentially dialects
                from Chinese if you express them in Chinese text. In a sense,
                all Romance languages are merely dialects of latin. It's just
                that unlike Chinese there was no unification and the written
                text became fragmented. English itself has various dialects,
                but because of faster travel, radio, and television the dialects
                have tended to remain understandable instead of morphing into
                something very different. However, I have trouble sometimes
                with Punjabees speaking their version of English.
                \_ The Roman alphabet is phonetic.  If written
                   Chinese was phonetic, then there might be more of an
                   argument that the difference Chinese dialects were distinct
                   languages.  Likewise, if the differences in speaking the
                   different Romance languages were not reflected in the
                   written language, it might be easier to argue that they are
                   dialects of Latin rather than distinct lanugages.
                   \_ Modern written Vietnamese is phonetic. There is a
                      way of writing Vietnamese that uses Chinese characters,
                      but this is considered archaic now.
        \_ Italian is closer to latin than Old Greek is to Modern Greek.
        \_ 1.  Latin survives/freezes in some quarters (RCC).  2.  Romanian is
           quite close to Latin.  3.  Living languages evolve: modern chinese
           is quite different from ancient Chinese.  (I speak and write the
           former but have a (very) limited capability for the latter.)  Greeks
           told me similar things about their language.  Hebrew is today like
           what it was many years ago because it had been dead in between.
           4.  By western liguist's definition, different Chinese dialects
           can be considered as different languages (with some slightly
           different but overall similar grammar rules).  Some Chinese consider
           spanish, french, and italian as different dialects of the same
           language used to be known as latin.  5.  There is a distinction
           between the spoken language (the tongue) and its representation
           in terms of writing.  6.  Japanese and Korean are NOT dialects
           of Chinese.  They are probably in a totaly different linguistic
           family although the details are not yet understood.They borrowed
           Chinese character and many chinese words (along with their old
           pronunciation) when they decided they should have a system of
           writing their language - they developed writing much later.
           However, the 2 koreas banned the use of Chinese characters in late
           last century when they go nationalistic.  7.  I don't know whether
           \_ I'm not sure what you mean here.  While true that, in the
              north Chinese characters are more or less banned, and they
              are trying to get away from using Chinese based words, this
              is not at all true in the south.  You can see pleanty of
              Chinese characters in the south, and most people's names
              are written in Chinese.  60% of the vocabulary is chinese
              based.  Chinese has not be "banned."  Now it HAS falled out
              of use, because chinese characters are a terrible way to
              write Korean.  Korean is not a chinese language.  The
              grammar is not chinese, and 40% of the words are pure
              Korean, and can't be reliably WRITTEN in chinese.  Korean
              and Japanese are Altaic languages with a butt-load of
              borrowed chinese vocabulary.
              \_ I have been told by a american professor specialising in the
                 2 koreas that Chinese characters have been banned from use
                 in literature and koreans can no longer read their own classic
                 literature directly (i.e. w/o translation) because they were
                 all written in Chinese (as Principia was written in Latin).
                 I knew (and wrote) that Korean language is completely
                 different from Chinese.  However, that it and Japanese
                 are really from the Altaic group is not firmly extablished
                 (as say Sanskrit and Latin came from the same family).
                 Plus the japanese always claim they have nothing to do with
                 korean, although I never believed that.
           Vietnamese is in the same linguistic family as Chinese but their
           current writing system was developed by the french.  8.  The eastern
           roman empire used greek.  9.  The roman empire was not "more"
           multicultural than the other empires of similar size.

3/11    Is CD1 all I need for general install of Debian 3.0r2?
        Or do I need to get all 7 CD? Thx.
        \_ I usually just get the netinstall cd image and install everything
           over the net, but I believe CD 1 has all of the core stuff.
        \_ CD1 works great either way, but if you have ethernet internet
           access, use http as your apt source rather than the cd.

3/11    dumb question, but I'm curious. Any guesses as to what
        "obidos" stands for in all the amazon urls'?
        \_ Our Business Involves Duping Our Shareholders
           Our Books Include Drawings Or Sentences

3/11    Did Germany ever have a chance of winning WWII?
        \_ Not after both the USA and USSR were involved, and after the USSR
           brought the German offensive to a stop. But before that happened,
           there were many possibilities that could have led to either victory
           or a peace arrangement by Germany. Without the USSR front, against
           just USA and Britain it seems like ultimately it still would have
           come down to Germany losing the air war, unless the Japan war went
           differently.
        \_ No. While they had superior technology, US had superior production
           power and relatively unlimited raw materials. The Yanks were
           cranking out their inferior Sherman tanks at a rate of 10-20X
           greater than the superior Panzer tanks, and even though 1 Panzer
           tank could take out about 3-4 Sherman tanks, it's the overwhelming
           number that wins. Same with P47/P51 vs. ME109s, etc. Germany
           attempted cheap/fast production towards the end of the war
           like the Volksjager but by then most of the German aces were dead
           and the Hitler Youths were too young to know how to fight.
                \_ same with the Chinese army. They have inferior weapons
                   but pushed into Korea with their fearless swarm of men.
                   \_ HA.  The main problem with the Chinese army (if you
                      mean the Nationalists) wasn't equipment but leadership.
                      Read "Stilwell and the American Experience in China"
                      by Tuchman if you care.
                      \_ Stilwell has a very one-sided view of things.
                         He is a military man, but had no idea of the
                         political side of things.
                         \_ Tuchman's political analysis in the book is
                            convincing.  Chiang Kai Shek was fundamentally
                            weak.
                            \_ Chiang Kai Shek has a very weak hand to
                               play.
                               \_ If Chiang Kai Shek had been a better
                                  politician and advocated some things
                                  like land reform, he probably would
                                  have beaten Mao. He just refused
                                  to compromise.
                                  \_ fat hopes.  CKS power base was
                                     in the coastal cities.  He had
                                     tenuous control over just a
                                     small part of China, and that
                                     was before the Japanese invaded
                                     and took that away.  And never
                                     underestimate the power of the
                                     idea of communism at that point
                                     in history, especially in a
                                     peasant society like China.
                                     Stilwell wants Chiang to fight
                                     the Japanese.  That's would be
                                     a dumb move.
                                     \_ Communism is ill suited for a peasant
                                        society whether in practice or in
                                        ideology.  Mao practiced and won with
                                        something else.
                                        \_ it didn't matter.  by the
                                           time the peasants realize
                                           that, the war was long over.
                                  \_ CKS had a very small army
                                     reasonably equiped (but far
                                     inferior to the Japanese) under
                                     his control.  The rest are
                                     ragtag troops pulled off the
                                     street.  There are also
                                     some warlords / generals
                                     fighting under his banner, but
                                     the troops under these people
                                     are loyal to these people, not
                                     to CKS.  They are often
                                     from the same province, etc.,
                                     and CKS could not ignore
                                     the views and interests of
                                     these warlords / generals.
                                     Outsiders way overestimated
                                     CKS's power.
                   \_ Germans had very good weapons.  Just not enough.
           \_ if they didn't attack Russia, maybe Germany would have
              consolidated their conquests.
           \_ if the Germans delayed enough, they could have had nuclear
              weapons
              \_ Frankly, My person take is that if Nazi didn't
                 1. attack russia, and 2. killing Jews, I really think they
                 got the chance to win.  I don't know if you noticed,
                 a lot of nuclear bomb scientist are jews escaped from Nazi's
                 insanity.
                 \_ Yeah, but without their racist ideas about Jews and
                    Slavs, it wouldn't have been Nazi Germany, it would
                    have been something more rational. Something more
                    rational would not have tried to conquer the world
                    against overwhelming odds.
                    \_ if they restricted themselves to a part of Europe
                        (like Poland and France), Hitler probably would
                        have had a longer career.
        \_ Possibly.  The most interesting counterfactual here is whether
           Stalin would have attacked had Hitler not.  Hitler believed Stalin
           was going to come get him once his military machine was up and
           running.  This was one of his main reasons for going in 1941 and
           surprising the hell out of the Red Army.  Stalin would have probably
           gone after Germany if he perceived weakness.  A fully rational
           policy on the part of Hitler would have taken all of Europe west
           of Poland and east of Great Britain, and stopping there, making it
           a very tough nut for Stalin to crack.  Russians had a hell of a
           time with the Finns, and Germans would have been 10 times worse.
           On the other hand, the Russians learned a lot from the Winter War.
           However, Hitler had other obsessions (autarky, jews, bolsheviks)
           which prevented rational policy.  Hitler also wasn't very smart.
             -- ilyas
           \_ I'm glad Hitler wasn't very smart -- he attacked Russia.
              But Stalin isn't that great either.
              \_ Stalin was regarded as brilliant by everyone who had
                 much dealing with him:
                 http://www.plp.org/books/Stalin/node138.html
                 \_ Stalin was a stupid peasant.  He was, however, unusually
                    ruthless, which explains his long tenure.  When the
                    Germans invaded in 1941 he disappeared for two weeks.  The
                    common theory is that he had a breakdown, and thought it
                    was all over.  The generals eventually convinced him to
                    return and head the war effort (by this time the Germans
                    had overran most of Ukraine and killed or captured many
                    millions of Red Army soldiers).  This link cites a bunch
                    of russian generals who knew better than to say something
                    other than what they said.  Also, the progressive labor
                    party's website?  Give me a break.  Ask a russian historian
                    instead. -- ilyas
                    \_ So Ilya, would you attribute Stalingrad simply to the
                       Russian soldiers solid unwillingness to give in?
                       \_ Stalingrad was the first time Stalin let Zhukov
                          handle the operation.  Stalin's big personal growth
                          during WWII consisted of realizing he should let the
                          professionals do their job (something Hitler never
                          learned).  Russian soldiers did many heroic things
                          during WWII, even considering the monstrous
                          compulsion imposed on them by the NKVD.
                          Nevertheless, Stalingrad was an operational, rather
                          than a tactical success.  People keep talking about
                          the street fighting, but the key to the operation
                          was the pincer maneuver which surrounded Paulus.
                          This was not something the Red Army could have pulled
                          off in 1941. -- ilyas
                 \_ I wasn't talking about Stalin as a military man.
                    I was talking about his human rights record.
           \_ frankly, I don't know who is more dumb, Hitler's obsession with
              bolsheviks, or our obsessioon with communism for the next 40
              years after Hitler is defeated.
              \_ Well, both Hitler and the US had legitimate concerns about
                 communism, since it was a bit of a hegemonising swarm object.
                 However, Hitler went further (and off the deep end) than
                 good policy dictated.  Whether the US policy of containment
                 was wise, or there was a better idea is still an open
                 question.  -- ilyas
                 \_ ilya, you deleted my comment.  You bad man! --ann coulter
                    \_ Not on purpose. -- ilyas
                    \_ Use motdedit and your stuff won't get deleted (as much).
                       \_ Dunno about that.  I did use motdedit.  It still got
                          deleted.  I'm pretty sure motdedit goes in the Kool
                          Aid category.  --ann coulter
        \_ maybe, but they lost so whats the point in discussing it now?
           \_ some people are interested in topics like this.
        \_ c.f. "war on two fronts"
           \_ If they didn't attack Russia, maybe they would have
              held on to more of Europe.
        \_ Hitler went in against a Sicilian when death was on the line.
           -geordan
        \_ Why so much random censorship on this thread?
        \_ Yes. Forget all of the BS about Russia and the second front. If
           Japan had managed to put down an invasion force in Hawaii, the
           US would never have approved a "Europe first policy."
           \_ very interesting thought.

3/11    Did Japan ever have a chance of winning WWII?
        \_ I don't know about Germany, but Japan really should have stopped
           in 1931 and consolidated its gains of Korea and Manchuria.  It
           could've been 3 times its current size in area and population.
           \_ If you can read some of the Japanese text, you will know that
              the reason why Japanese continue to fight China is because
              Japanese know very well that they can't consolidate their
              gains in Manchuria unless China is fully subdued.
              \_ yea, written by those same Japanese who thought they
                 could attack US and still win the war.  The Japanese
                 warmongering militarists wrote that cause they need
                 war to advance their careers and keep them in power.
                 \_ Both sides underestimated each other. The US never thought
                    Japan would attack. Japan thought the US would roll over.
           \_ I agree.  But the American industrial machine would have
              been to strong.
              \_ They are not at war with the US, and not even with
                 China.  War restarted with China in 1937 when Japan
                 invaded other parts of China.
           \_ They had food, but they needed oil and rubber.
              \_ Not if they didn't start another war with China by
                 invading in 1937.  US is happily trading with Japan
                 until like a year before 1941?
                 \_ yup, selling scrap metals, oils, and all the good stuff
                    which fueled Japanese imperial army's machinary.
           \_ i dont' understand this, why so many people on MOTD *WISH*
              Japan has consolidated their conquest?
              \_ motd full of crazy asian people.  My car so haaaaa!
              \_ I don't think wish is the key word.
        \_ No. The Japanese wanted the US to accept their annexation of
           southeast Asia, making them the major power of the Pacific. The US
           would never have agreed to cede that region to Japan. The US had
           claimed the Pacific as their ocean.
           \_ Philippines was a US Colony.  If Japan invades the Philippines,
              it is declaring war on the US
              \_ Wrong part of SE Asia. Think Indonesia. Oil and rubber. The
                 Japanese would never had touched US territories if the US
                 hadn't put the hammer down on trade. SE Asia had most of what
                 Japan had been trading for with the US.
                 \_ skipping the Philippines and Taiwan to get to
                    Indonesia is strange.  Indonesia is south of
                    the Philippines.
                    \_ Yes, you are correct. Lesson time! US no trade -> Japan
                       must find other oil -> Oil in SE Asia -> Japan knows US
                       not let Japan get oil -> Japan invade PI, maybe Hawaii
                       to scare US -> Japan screw up in Hawaii -> US eventually
                       kick Japan ass.

3/12    What's the simplest way to add a mutex to C function?  I understand
        threading issues, but something is munging data in my sockets, and I
        want to guarantee that only one thread is touching a certain array at
        a time.  TIA.
        \_ How nice.  Why don't you learn how to format instead of waiting
           for one of our poor OCD inflicted nerds to do it for you?
                                   \_ afflicted
        \_???? Shouldn't your thread library that you are using provide
          this functionality???
        \_ isn't there an API like win32 api if on windows?
           \_ I was hoping there was something quicker/easier-- no libraries,
              just... I don't know, OS?  How effective would incrementing
              decrementing my own static mutex be?
              \_ Well, unless you use OS calls for a mutex, it's not really a
                 mutex.  Are you thinking you can just use a static variable
                 and manage it yourself?  Which OS is this?
              \_ in some os's you could get by just exclusively opening
                 a file
        \_ some sort of Singleton class and have an being accessed field?

3/11    What's your favorite War movie?  WWII Movie?
        Schindler's List doesn't count.
        \_ Patton
           \_ didn't that win Best Picture?
              \- if we are not victorious, let no man remain alive.
        \_ Six String Samurai
        \_ The Empire Strikes Back
           \_ we should add a separate category - sci fi epics/battles
        \_ Saving Private Ryan
        \_ Saving Ryan's Privates
        \_ Raiders of the Lost Ark

3/11    Does anyone know where I can buy one of those Flying Tigers
        leather jacket with a ROC flag at the back.  I want to buy one
        in remembrance of what Americans have done for my country and
        my people (and it looks cool too).      - chinese dude
        \_ Aw come on.  Chennault was a twink who never accomplished anything
           of signifance other than getting the Japanese to blow up his
           airfields.

3/11    At what "link quality" level (as shown by iwconfig) does network
        speed/latency begin to get worse?

it was the dawn of the third decade of the CSUA, ten years after the XCF War.
The Server-Talk Project was a dream given form.  Its goal: to prevent another
disk-space war by creating a place where students and alumni could work out
their differences peacefully. It's a port of wall, /home away from /home for
diplomats, hustlers, entrepeneurs, and wanderers.  Files and programs stored
in two million, five hundred thousand sectors of spinning metal, all alone
in the machine room. It can be a dangerous place, but it's our last, best
hope for peace. This is the story of the last of the soda workstations.  The
year is 1997. The name of the place is Soda Mark V.
        \_ Soda was run off of workstations?  Any hoary old guys want to tell
           other stories?
           \_ at one time the entire computing power of the csua wouldn't
              have been a match for a modern cell phone or pda.
              \_ at one time the csua didn't even have a machine.  what's
                 your point?
        \_ the war with xcf didn't end in 1987.

3/11    Lots of massive motd editing/censoring/trimming today.
        \_ crap.  I miss all the best stuff on heavy work days....

3/11    Cal basketball sucks.
        \_ oh well, at least football's on the rise.
           \_ Ranked No. 11 on one person's pre-season list:
                http://tinyurl.com/2wuyh (sports.espn.go.com)
        \_ so what?
           \_ i'm sorry. linux rules! windoze sucks! better?
              \_ no I just don't see why anyone cares about college sports.
                 \_ I just don't see why anyone gives a shit what you care
                    about. I don't understand your obsession with gay sex,
                    but I don't whine about it.
                    \_ yeah whatever.  so like I said at the top, "so what?"
                       why does anyone (other than the troll) care about this
                       stuff?
                       \_ cause I enjoy playing and watching basketball,
                          and also rooting for cal while having some good
                          food is a great way to have fun and also build
                          comraderie with my cal buddies.  - yap
                          \_ thanks.  that's the first/only real answer I've
                             *ever* seen to that question.
        \_ you didn't really come for the sports did you?
           \_ I didn't even know that "Cal" was U.C. Berkeley before I
              came, and sports weren't a factor in that decision, but
              that doesn't mean we have to accept mediocrity (or worse). --!op
              \_ you could pay for better HS kids in the sports program but
                 wouldn't it be better if that money was instead spent on
                 academic scholarships for the smart but poor kids from the
                 same ghetto schools?  wouldn't it be better if a kid thought
                 that getting an education was the best way out instead of
                 playing a game?  and what happens to the 99% of kids who
                 aren't good enough to get that college sports scholarship?
                 yep, that's right, they're fucked and the cycle repeats.
                 \_ "That money" is money coming from a sports supporter;
                    there's no reason to believe that, absent a sports
                    program, they'd still be donating money to Cal.
                    \_ And the seats and profs and admin and everything else
                       required by athletic scholarships is 100% supported by
                       outside money?
                       \_ Yes. Sports programs tend to make money for the
                          school, not cost money.
                          \_ So you honestly believe that having the sports
                             program creates more seats for non-athletes than
                             if there wasn't a sport program?  Having 1000+
                             'students' on athletic scholarships creates more
                             than 1000 seats for non-athletes?  They pay for
                             the insurance, the people who clean the stadiums,
                             the cops for the events, lost space on campus, and
                             everything else involved in keeping the program
                             running?  It's completely self sufficient?  I
                             very seriously doubt that.  yap said it's about
                             comraderie and fun and such.  That's a fine
                             reason, let's not pretend it is self sufficient or
                             even a money maker over-all.
                             \_ Read the URL below.
                \_ no they do not "tend" to make money at all, they may
                   make a little, but the school ends up buying bigger
                   and more expensive facilities and hire more staff
                   and throw more money at their sports programs,
                   which if you look at the total financial picture taken
                   in groups of a few years, instead of your immediate balance
                   sheet, the school loses vasts amounts of money they
                   should have spent on College Board bribes.
                   \_ I'm sorry, but the sports programs are self-supporting.
                      Gate receipts, ticket revenues, and revenue sharing
                      (plus boosters) ensure the school doesn't pay a dime.
                      Many schools make money this way. Football is
                      especially profitable. The small sports do cost money.
                      http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/sports/links/uwfinances08.html

3/11    Probably haven't seen one of these since before the bubble, but
        does anyone have a particular strategy for exercising options
        that they advocate? I don't need the money immediately and am
        trying to minimize my tax liabilities. I can afford to pay the
        exercise price if that will help. -saarp
        \_ to avoid risking AMT, just sell as soon as you exercise..
        \_ you should pay what you owe and stop looking for loop holes to
           avoid giving back to society.
        \_ What kind of options?  ISO or NonQ?
           \_ NQ -saarp

3/11    Wow!  This is the longest motd I've seen so far.
        \_ 480 lines... that's nothing.
        \_ certainly not a record, but noteworthy nonetheless. I've archived
           large motd's too, by date.  Biggest on record was 856 lines.
           ~mehlhaff/motd_archive/ -ERic

3/11    Truck carrying $1e6 in computers stolen:
        http://www.indystar.com/articles/6/128121-2046-127.html

3/11    Bombing in Spain:
        http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/03/11/spain.blasts/index.html

3/11    Female rats can produce new eggs after they are born:
        http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99994765
        \_ Great as if there weren't enough rats already.