Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:June:24 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30986 Activity:insanely high
6/24    You know the release of interrogation memos a couple days ago?
        Notice they did not include any State Department letters, ones that
        argue against Ashcroft and the Justice Department's legal conclusions?
        The Washington Post got one of the State Dept letters.  Guess who
        also gets bashed?  Boalt Law Professor John Yoo.  If you read to the
        end of the article, you'll also find that the military intelligence
        officers at Guantanamo who were supposed to be doing the abusing
        complained and ultimately reversed the policy.
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A759-2004Jun23.html
           \_ Bush/Cheney 2004!
              \_ Yeah! Bush/Cheney! http://www.georgewbush.org
        \_ Why do you hate Ashcroft?
           \_ Bush/Cheney 2004!
        \_ Holy shit!  You mean our soliders aare actually good guys and thus
           the half dozen knuckle draggers in Abu Graib are an aberation and
           not taking their orders straight from Dubya?  Would ever woulda
           not taking their orders straight from Dubya?  Who ever woulda
           thunk that our guys aren't all raping murderous bastards?  This
           WAPO story must be a lie.
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30987 Activity:moderate
6/23    http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Voter-Drive-Felons.html
        Kerry campaign gives Felons a new chance to scout the area for
        houses to rob and children to rape.
        \_ Why do you hate Kerry?
        \_ The felons already had the chance to scout the area.  This just
           gives them an excuse to be at some mother's door with a clipboard
           in hand gathering personal information from people.  It's still
           woefully stupid.  I prefer to think Kerry's people are so blinded
           by hate and ambition they would do anything to win rather than
           they are outright evil which is what you imply.
           thunk that our guys aren't all raping murderous bastards?  This
           WAPO story must be a lie.
2004/6/24 [Science/Electric, Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:30988 Activity:very high
6/24    Your body belongs to Bill Gates:
        http://news.com.com/2100-1014_3-5244766.html
        http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,116655,00.asp
        \_ All your skin are belong to us.
        \_ "Since last year, Microsoft has been on a campaign to
           generate more money from its intellectual property, and in
           recent weeks the company has obtained patents for
           double-clicking, XML-scripting methods and a system for
           generating a to-do list from source code."
           \_ Double-click? I guess they are more evil than Apple trying
              to patent the GUI.
              \_ I don't think it's evil for microsoft or apple to try to
                 patent stupid stuff; I think it's evil for the patent office
                 to let them get away with it.
        \_ No.  The rights to produce products that uses your skin as an
           electrical conduit to power Windows powered wearable computing
           devices belongs to Microsoft in certain parts of the world for
           the next few years.  But that isn't as exciting as claiming BG
           owns your skin.
           \_ I thought the agents in the Matrix already has this technology.
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:30989 Activity:very high
6/24    The UN declined to extend the US's immunity from the International
        Criminal Court.  That immunity expires June 30th, the same day Iraq is
        supposed to be turned over to a provisional government.  Although Iraq
        is not a signatory to the ICC, what would happen if the new "soverign"
        government immediatly ratified the ICC treaty?  Supposedly US soldiers
        could be prosecuted in cases where the US is unwilling to prosecute.
        \_ putting sudan on the UN human rights panel even
           strays my liberal thought shield
           \_ What's wrong with Sudan?  Did Sudan invade another country
              with no cause other than a desire to control that country's
              oil?  Did Sudan illegally imprison and torture thousands of
              foreign citizens whose only desire is freedom from foreign
              rule?  Did Sudan betray their own citizens and constitution
              by imprisoning them in gulags with no legal recourse?  Sudan
              is much better qualified to sit on the UN panel than America.
              \_ Sudan is in the middle of their own little genocide.
                 \_ And America is in the middle of a Crusade fueled by a
                    lust for oil.  I still ask you why is America better
                    than Sudan.  I wish our hands were as clean as Sudans'.
                        \_ what planet do you live on and how much pot
                           and marx did it take you to get there?
        \_ I like the cut of your jib! --aaron
        \_ Those soldiers should be prosecuted for raping all those Japanese
           woman.
           \_ Which soldiers?  The American ones who got prosecuted for
              raping all tose Japanese women?
              \_ all of them got a slap on a wrisk for abduct and rape
                 14 years old "japanese" women.
        \_ No real country would bring an American up on charges.  Anyway,
           that can only happen in this (bogus) legal context if the country
           the person is a citizen of doesn't have a real legal system and
           doesn't do anything about their own war crimes.  Aaron and similar
           echo-chamber leftists may drool at the possibility of 3 judges from
           the Sudan, Cuba, and North Korea putting an American soldier or
           some high ranking political official on a UN sponsored show trial
           but it'll never happen in the real world.
           \_ Could we hear from the ehco-chamber motd brownshirts one more time
              about how "why do you hate america" is a straw man?  I need
              a good laugh today.
2004/6/24 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:30990 Activity:high
6/24    http://www.pvponline.com
        Online idiots hate Captain America!  (In the news section)
        \_ Heh, when I play online and people have idiotic sound-bite names
           (Bush sux, etc.) I just start team-killing.  Much more fun that way.
2004/6/24-25 [Reference/Law/Court] UID:30991 Activity:high
6/24    In the "I can't make this shit up" category:
        Judge getting dismissed for using a penis pump, shaving his
        pubic hair and "pleasuring himself" behind the bench while presiding
        over court cases: http://csua.org/u/7wi
        \_ Maybe he was hearing rape cases.
        \_ I suspect he was pre-shaved.  It's unlikely he actually shaved
           while court was in session.
           \_ I reject your use of the word "unlikely."  Have you been
              building up statistics on the genital-shaving practices of
              judges in and out of the courtroom?  I didn't think so.
              \_ idiot.  have you ever shaved yourself or another?  he'd
                 either gash the hell out of his dick and balls or he would
                 get caught.  keep your anal retentive self where someone
                 cares.
                 \_ he did get caught.
                    \_ not shaving himself.  go away anal boy.
                       \_ He's not anal, he's just fuck-stupid...and not
                          nearly as funny as he thinks he is.
              \_ As a likely male, he can attest to the difficulties of
                 male genital shaving.  Even pervs don't want to nick their
                 winkie.
2004/6/24-25 [Transportation/Car, Reference/Law/Court] UID:30992 Activity:nil
6/24    If you get a parking ticket and the court makes it practically
        impossible to get a hearing, would you have standing to sue on the
        grounds that there has been a constructive denial of access to the
        courts?
        \- if it is because you are handicapped and have to crawl up the
           stairs to the courtroom without handicapped access, probably.
           YMWTS: Tennessee v Lane. --psb
           \_ I already know that case, that's why I'm asking. -op
              \- well that opinion should give you a sense of how to
                 think about the issue. anythign more specific to your
                 circumstances will need localized facts, naturally.
                 parking offenses with trivial fines/consequences may
                 involves some shortcuts. --psb
2004/6/24 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:30993 Activity:very high
6/24    Ron Reagan speaks! First telling Bush & Co, Inc. That real men
        don't invoke Ronald Reagan's name to get their agenda pushed thru.
        And now he tells Bush & Co. off about Iraq war. It's about time:
        http://tinyurl.com/yq79c
        \_ wow, nice way to misquote Ron.  He never said the first thing
           although it was falsely reported that way.  Must be the busines
           elite controlled media that wants Kerry in office.
        \_ Reagan in 2012!!!!
        \_ Why do liberals keep saying Bush lied our way into an Iraq war?
           Obviously he made his decisions based on the best available
           information at the time -- so you should say it was a CIA failure.
           Iraq had WMDs, and the head of CIA said it was a slam dunk.  What
           President would question that?
           \_ I'll assume you're trolling, so I'll keep it short: there were
              many complaints from the CIA rank and file about being forced
              to produce evidence to support a predetermined conclusion.
              \_ I can produce an equal or greater number of URLs with
                 CIA rank and file saying they felt no pressure at all.
                 Do you have a URL for the bi-partisan 9/11 commission
                 conclusions?
                 Besides, who says Bush came down on CIA rank-and-file to
                 force conclusions?  Even Clinton supports Bush going to war;
                 nowhere does Bill say Bush lied about it.
                 \_ In the end, it always comes down to a matter of trust.
                    There will always be missing information from what
                    either side can learn.  It comes down to this: do you
                    believe Bush to be trustworthy, and do you believe that
                    he generally acts in the best interests of the country?
                    I believe the answer is no, and that his actions should
                    be judged in that context.
                    \_ So you already didn't like the guy so he must be lying
                       but if you previously did like the guy then it was ok
                       to invade Iraq.  So your feelings about the man then
                       make him into a liar and justify your feelings about
                       the man in a circular pattern that makes it nearly
                       impossible for him to earn your trust.
                    \_ I believe the total picture provided by TV media, print
                       media, and VIPs shows that Bush always acted to defend
                       the U.S. against terrorism, and was provided poor
                       intelligence on Iraq.  Like I said, even Clinton
                       supported Bush going to war.
                       Thesis:  "Bush didn't lie."
                   \_ I disagree.  It's not about trust.  It's about the
                      inability to see good policy through to the end.  The
                      UN Weapons Inspectors were doing a good job.  The
                      sanctions and containment were working. Bush wanted to
                      invade Iraq so badly that he was willing and eager to
                      accept any intelligence, no matter how dodgy, that
                      supported his desire to invade preemptively. He pushed
                      his vision when he should have weighed the evidence more
                      carefully.  He made speeches based on evidence that
                      should have been examined more than once.  He let his
                      eagerness goad him into believeing something that the
                      facts did not support, and then he sold that belief to
                      the American people.  That he was careful to let
                      innuendo do the job for him rather than blatantly lying
                      is no excuse; that's standard CYA.
                      \_ It isn't his job to question the evidence presented.
                         By the time the information gets to him it *better*
                         already be the best possible information available.
                         If the President of the United States Of America has
                         to question the intelligence briefs he gets every day
                         then we're much more fucked than having what some of
                         you consider a liar in office.
                         \_ It is the job of the CoC to understand that an
                            argument based on one sketchy source is not
                            a viable argument for going to war.  Yes, I want
                            the President to be able to discern between
                            reasonable intel and fairy tales based on fluff.
                            \_ Do you really think the intel is presented as,
                               "And yeah boss this one questionable character
                               we paid to say some stuff said this stuff but
                               it's kinda sketchy.  Should we invade now?"
                               Oftentimes intel has one and only one source
                               and you're lucky to get that.  This isn't
                               journalism school.
                               \_ Intel that comes from one source, unless
                                  that one source is the Baby Jesus, is
                                  highly suspect.  If you run with it, you
                                  must know that you're running a huge risk
                                  of it turning out bad.  When it turns out
                                  bad and results in the needless deaths of
                                  hundreds of US soldiers, it's your duty
                                  to cop to and resign.
                \_ Tennet was obsessed with Al Qaeda.  Clinton told Bush
                   that Al Qaeda, North Korea, and Pakistein is probably a
                   greater security threat than Iraq in terms of priority.
                   and in case you don't remember, Bush said that Iraq
                   supported 9/11 attack, and Iraq had tons of WMD, and
                   Iraq was actively buying Uranium from Africa.
                   \_ Clinton told Bush what?  You know this because?  Clinton
                      said so on 9/12/2001?  Clinton said and continues to
                      say a lot of things.  Some are even true.
                   \_ Bush said there were Iraq/al-Qaeda links, he never said
                      Iraq supported 9/11.  Tenet said Iraq had WMD.  Tenet
                      approved the speech that said Iraq was buying uranium
                      from Africa.
                      Thesis:  "Bush didn't lie."
                      \_ where is that Iraq/al-Qaeda link, then?  and
                         in case you don't know.  Bush is the commander in
                         chief.  he is ultimately responsible for everything,
                         eventhough he tend to blame everythign to his
                         inferiors when things go wrong.
                         \_ Holy cow!  Are you really denying a link between
                            Iraq and middle eastern islamic terrorism?
                         \_ So you think we should hang our officials anytime
                            they make an error?  Decision makers must always
                            be perfect?  Anything less and we should do what?
                            Vote in some idiot just because he isn't the first
                            guy?
                         \_ The bi-partisan 9/11 commission said there were
                            links:
        http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-06-17-hadley_x.htm
                            Bush is ultimately responsible, but the point
                            I am making is that he didn't lie about Iraq.
           \_ Bush didn't lie.  He is just misled.  He is not the brightest,
              you know.
                            \_ Bush drew very explicit links between Iraq
                               and terrorism; terrorism, in the minds of
                               Americans, means al Qaeda; so, many people
                               took his comments to mean that there were
                               explicit links between Iraq and 9/11. Cf.
                                http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm
                               To say that he did not mean to say that Iraq
                               was directly linked to 9/11 is a lot like
                               saying, "Will no one rid me of this troublesome
                               priest?" and then wondering aloud why your
                               most loyal men have murdered the Archbishop of
                               Canterbury.
                               \_ Ok, so now you're saying he didn't lie and
                                  it is his fault that the media through the
                                  op/ed pages misrepresented what he said and
                                  the American people believed the media.  Your
                                  line of reasoning is broken and twisted.
                                  Just let it go.
                                  \_ You're kidding, right?  The man is not
                                     the brightest bulb, but he and his
                                     minders (Rove, Cheney) are masters at
                                     putting out the image.  Lying by
                                     innuendo is a basic trick in the GOP
                                     playbook.
                                     \_ Ok so now it's just a big VRWC.  Ok,
                                        thanks for playing.  We went from
                                        "BUSH LIED!" to "Bush is a dim bulb
                                        guy who didn't understand that he was
                                        being manipulated by the evil NeoCon
                                        VRWC".  You could at least try to be
                                        consistent instead of allowing yourself
                                        to get pushed further and further away
                                        from your original point, which you
                                        clearly lost, you are better off,
                                        rhetorically speaking, granting the
                                        point and starting a new thread on
                                        your fall back position.  So now we
                                        can agree that Bush didn't lie but
                                        possible the evil NeoCons manipulated
                                        the poor dumb drunken coked out Texan.
                                        But that's for a different thread, eh?
                                        \_ 1) There's more than one person
                                              responding to you, so I guess
                                              you win.
                                           2) It's not a conspiracy. It's very
                                              savvy message manipulation and
                                              PR. Why does that disturb you?
           \_ Bush didn't lie.  He was just misled.  He is not the brightest,
              you know.  Of course, next time US try to tell other countries
              about something the CIA found out, they will just rofl, and
              ask, "Did your mama told you so this time? Bwahahaha!"
              \_ Ok, so we made a mistake. We invaded a country. Who's gonna
                 pay for this? We, we are gonna pay for this with our blood
                 and lives when the suicide bomber hit us. Someone needs to
                 be held accountable for this, as this is not the kind shit that
                 can be dismissed with a simple, ooops.
                 \_ Hint: the suicide bombers were hitting us long before we
                    invaded Iraq.  Buy a calendar.
              \_ Except for the fact that the intelligence agencies from all
                 these other countries were saying the same things which you
                 should know if you're not a complete ignoramous but you ignore
                 because you have an axe to grind and an agenda to push.
                 \_ really?  what were they saying?
                    \_ damn, buy a newspaper.  the whole western world agreed
                       back in 1998 that saddam had wmd.  there is no reason
                       to believe that the stock piles everyone believed
                       existed back then suddenly disintegrated since the
                       1998 inspectors left because of a blue stained dress.
           \_ It is undeniable that Iraq, along with Iran, was the largest
              state sponsor of terror.  In 1993 after WTCI the Ney York FBI
              believed Iraq was responsible for the bombing.  Where did Abu
              Abbas and Abu Nidal live?  Where did the only fugitive of WTCI
              live?  Saddam had repeated contacts with Al Qaeda.  What about
              the planned chemical attack in Jordan?  Dozens of sarin shells?
              WMD components in scrapyards....  [formatd]
              \_ Yikes!  Facts!  Stop!
              \_ We should nuke the country that has the most WMD on earth.
                 \_ Wow!  You are soooo smart!  Go away, you drooling troll.
                    This isn't High School.
2004/6/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:30994 Activity:very high 57%like:33376 50%like:33798
6/24    New CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll!
        Most Americans now think the Iraq war wasn't worth it, was a mistake,
        and made America *less* safe from terrorism (55% less safe, 37% safer,
        6% no change, 2% on opinion), AND, Bush would still make a better
        commander in chief, AND Bush leads by a statistically insignificant
        amount among likely voters.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/polls/usatodaypolls.htm
        \_ Ok, and?
                \_ American people are stupid and clueless from the start.
                   \_ No.  It is a comparison.  It says that despite whatever
                      mistakes a number of people feel Bush has made, they
                      still believe he would be better than Kerry.  It does
                      not say they believe he is doing a great job.  Just
                      better than Kerry and *that* is what wins elections.
                      \_ one small change to what you wrote:
                         it's "better commander in chief" where Bush leads,
                         not "who would you vote for for President", which is
                         where they are tied.
                         \_ I stand corrected.  No problem.  So my followup
                            is that being a better commander in chief is not
                            the only thing people are using to decide their
                            votes.  The idea that the American people are
                            clueless and stupid is not backed by this poll.
                      \_ World would be even more blowed up if Kerry was
                         President.
        \_ And, the poll URL ("Poll: Iraq a mistake") disappears off the
           http://cnn.com front page.  Story of 100+ people dying and 300+ wounded
           in 1 day in Iraq is moved down.  New lead story:  NASA's future.
           \_ Uh huh, and...?
              \_ Do I really need to say it?
                 \_ Say what, exactly?  Stale news gets moved aside in favor
                    of less stale news.  Hello?  Information age?
                    \_ Actually it got moved back up to the front page today.
                       Guess they didn't want to be accused of burying this,
                       when they had prominent stories on all previous
                       CNN/USA Today/Gallup polls.  Guess they also want
                       to appear non-partisan, but not piss off the Bushies
                       too much.  I really doubt it has to do with "stale"
                       news, especially since the original story had been
                       released 8:30pm Eastern Thursday night.
                       \_ Be serious.  CNN's news portal is a business, a
                          business that gauges success by the number of
                          clicks.  You bet your ass they keep track of which
                          articles are being clicked on, and when that
                          click-rate drops below a certain threshold, new
                          stories are rotated in.  I think you *drastically*
                          overestimate the degree of politicization.
                          \_ I basically agree with this; I don't think
                             mainstream news outlets care that much about
                             what they're reporting, but they do pander to
                             what people will want to hear/read.  Except in
                             cases like talk about media mergers, where the
                             reporting is all on the side of how great they
                             are.
                             The idea that the media is biased towards liberal
                             is totally ridiculous, but I don't buy into
                             the vast right wing media conspiracy either.  -tom
           \_ this is exactly why I don't understand people kept saying that
              news media has a liberal bias.  At least for TV media, if
              anything, the bias seems favors republicans.
              \_ How is splashing the death of 100 Iraqis across CNN, when
                 8000 Americans die daily of cancer, heart disease, and
                 doctor error, not liberal bias?
                 \_ Are you trolling?  Or are you really that dense?
                    \_ If you don't have a real response, just don't say
                       anything.  Leave space for those who have a response.
                       You're wasting precious bits.
                       \_ I agree with op.  You are trolling, dewd.
                          \_ Hey "dewd", that was my first entry on this
                             thread.  I didn't post the part about 8000 vs 100
                             dying.  So at best it is 2:2.  And there's still
                             no reaponse of any note.  This is all bullshit
                             meta-response.
                       \_ OK, on the off chance you're not trolling...
                          It's not liberal bias because the job of the news
                          media is only to report stories that are newsworthy.
                          100 people dying in Iraq in a single day is a news
                          event.  8000 people dying of heart disease and cancer
                          is an everyday event, and hence not news.  Is it
                          right wing bias for the news to not report the
                          hundreds of Americans killed by handgun violence
                          everyday?  No it's not.  Individual events might be
                          news, but a general trend is not.
                          \_ Soldiers returning from Iraq are much more
                             terrified of Iraq portrayed in the news here
                             in this country, than they are there patrolling
                             the streets.  Are the thousands of construction
                             projects carried out by our soldiers (patching
                             homes, re-opening schools, delivering supplies,
                             etc. covered by our news media day to day? They
                             are not, thus combined with continuous reports
                             of casualties, we get results from "polls" where
                             Americans ask "[Why are we there?]" We're there
                             *nation* *building*.  When you clear a nest of
                             hornets, you're going to get stung many times.
                             This is the greatness of America, we are strong
                             and rich because this is one of the last nations
                             not drowning in corruption.  Any of the soliders
                             are worth 100 times any CSUAer myself included.
                             So splashing a statistically insignificant
                             number of deaths, and not reporting the
                             thousands of good things that happen every day
                             is liberal bias, IMHO.
                             \_ That's not liberal bias for the reasons
                                outlined above.  100 Iraqis dying in a single
                                day is unusual, and hence, newsworthy.  Things
                                being rebuilt in Iraq is an everyday occurance
                                and hence not newsworthy.
                                \_ An everyday un-reported occurrence.
                                \_ An everyday un-reported occurrence.  When
                                   things like thousands of positive daily
                                   news events go un-reported, and deaths
                                   and casualties lead the news nightly,
                                   then "polls" become worthless.
                                   \_ "If it bleeds, it leads" has been the
                                      motto of news editors for as long as I
                                      can remember.  If you want news of the
                                      Army's good deeds read Stars and Stripes.
                                      As for the worth of polls, they tell us
                                      what the public thinks, not what is the
                                      true state of the world.
                             \_ I don't think people have a problem with the
                                current "Why are we there?" (nation building),
                                but "we shouldn't have been there in the first
                                place."  Myself included, there are many
                                who are, and were against our involvement, but
                                aren't screaming to bring the trooops home NOW
                 \_ "100+ Iraqis die in single day of attacks; meanwhile,
                    8,000 Americans died of cancer, heart diseases, doctor
                    error.  Fair and balanced, from Fox News!"
2004/6/24-25 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:30995 Activity:kinda low
6/24    Hotmail to increase storage.  Should I buy storage stocks?
        http://tinyurl.com/2suo3
        \_ No.  You should sell storage stocks.  The amount of storage a place
           like hotmail or yahoo or google needs is only a few tens of
           millions at most and the cost of storage per terabyte continues to
           plunge rapidly.  The storage industry has razor thin margins which
           is why the dozens of companies you could buy a drive from in the 80s
           is now Seagate, Maxtor, Western Digital, and (if you're stupid)
           Fujitsu.
           \_ IBM's gone?
              \- ibm sold much of it's disk drive stuff to hitachi --psb
              \_ Sold to Hitachi.  They handled they 60 and 70 gig failing HD
              \_ Sold to Hitachi.  They handled the 60 and 70 gig failing HD
                 problem very poorly.  I wouldn't trust them or Hitachi who
                 bought it because it's mostly the same people.
                        \_ Hitachi seems to have cleaned up the division.
                           The new 120-180 gb drives are reliable and
                           come with good warranties (3 yrs for some).
           \_ There is also Samsung. I have one, it's quiet and seems fast,
              no idea about reliability but I haven't heard horror stories.
              \_ same here. i bought it mainly for its quietness, but thus
                 far no issues after 6-8 months, which is more than i could
                 say for some drives i've owned *cough*quantum*cough*
           \_ Don't buy a maxtor. The 120 and 160s have lots of problems.
2004/6/24-25 [Uncategorized] UID:30996 Activity:kinda low
6/24    Gmail is so last week. What you really want is an address here:
        http://abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijk.com
        \_ Hahahaha, I can't stop laughing. This is so funny. I may want one.
        \_ what?  no tinyurl or http://csua.org/u URL? :)
2004/6/24 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:30997 Activity:high
6/24    Why no manual for woman!! why?? why!!!
        [xxx@@soda ~]% man man
        [xxx@@soda ~]% man woman
        No manual entry for woman
        [xxx@@soda ~]%
        \_ Because FreeBSD 4.7 is not politically correct.  Google for
           "Politically Correct UNIX System VI Release notes", which I've read
           more than 10yrs ago (not as a web page, of course.)
           \_ http://www.laughnet.net/archive/compute/newunix.htm
        \_ Why would a man want to enter a woman?  A man shound only enter
           another man!
           \_ Oh that's fucking sick. Of course I want to enter a woman, not
              a man you sicko.
              \_ In the Catholic version of UNIX, man enters boy.
        \_ There wasn't enough space on /usr to install it.
2004/6/24-25 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:30998 Activity:kinda low
6/24    Do CSUA members go to concerts?  Been to any concerts lately?
        Plan to go to any this year?
        \_ I'll be going to the Aquabats show in July.
        \_ Pixies at the Greek
        \_ Van Morrison, David Bowie, John Hiatt, The Bobs, recently.
           David Byrne, soon.  -tom
           \_ too bad Bowie isn't playing anymore (in the next few months)
              \_ Bowie (at the Berkeley Community Theater) was great, one of
                 the best shows I've seen in years.  -tom
        \_ Tokyo Ska Paradise Orchestra at the Independent last Friday.  2.5
           hours of the most energetic and wonderful ska I've ever heard.
           --erikred
           \_ Dang, wish I'd known.  -jrleek
              \_ Sorry, man.  I'll post it next time.
        \_ No, CSUA members only sit on the wall and scribble on the motd
           24x7.
           \_ it does seem that way sometimes.
2004/6/24 [Uncategorized] UID:30999 Activity:nil
6/24    Some sites say they may share information and if you don't agree,
        you can't use their site.  What would you do?  Example: ticketmaster
2004/6/24-25 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:31000 Activity:very high
6/24    omg, cheney cusses in senate. http://drudgereport.com
        "Cheney curses senator over Halliburton criticism...
         VP to Sen. Leahy: 'F**k You'... Nearly a dozen senators witnessed..."
        \_ Poor guy's under a lot of pressure right now, what with being
           caught lying and all about Iraq / Al Qaeda connections.
           \_ Wow, this is so done.  Let's have a direct quote which turned
              out to be false.
              \_ Gee, I've got more than two hundred. Here's one, you
                 wilfully ignorant fool: "There is no doubt that Saddam
                 Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." --Dick Cheney
           \_ Clinton lost it during an interview with the BBC.  He accused
              them of siding with the "far-right" for asking a non-softball
              question.  At least with Republicans, it takes idiotic
              criticism night and day to finally see them pop, but with
              Democratic politicians, anything can make them burst, because
              of the constant coddling they get.  Bush and his crew, despite
              being accomplished and impressively educated, get called
              "stupid" by all kinds of Hollywood people who dropped out of
              high school and college to act.
                \_ I forgot to tell you Clinton doesn't control the world anymore.
              \_ I forgot to tell you Clinton doesn't control the world
                 anymore.
                 \_ Fortunately, he never did.  What gave you the idea that
                    the US President controls the world?
              \_ Actually, only Bush gets called stupid.  (Cheney is called
                 evil, Rummy is called a warmonger, Wolfowitz is called
                 a neocon.)
              \_ Have you actually seen the Clinton interview?
                 http://www.bbc.co.uk/newsa/n5ctrl/progs/panorama/latest.ram
                 The "losing it" bit is about 16-17 minutes into it.  I
                 don't think it is fair to say he lost it, but you should at
                 least see it yourself before you make up your mind.  (Oh and
                 a short 1 minute edited clip does not mean you saw it.) -aspo
                 \_ So you'll make sure in the future to not take Republican
                    statements and events out of context?  Is there a 17 minute
                    clip leading up to Cheney "losing it" we can watch?
                    \_ So I'll take it you haven't seen it?  When there are
                       clips available I'll watch them, when there are full
                       transcripts I'll read them.  In this case I really don't
                       think Clinton lost it at all, but yes I have a bias.
                       As for Cheney, I don't see why the fuck anyone cares.
                       All it means to me is that this adminstration is
                       feeling the heat a hell of a lot more.  Yay! -aspo
           \_ You know, I'm getting tired of this repeated lie.  The head of
              the 9/11 commission has said there's no significant difference
              between what the President and VP are saying and what the
              commission is saying.  You want to argue this?  Post your quotes
              and sign your name. -emarkp
              \_ The 9/11 commision and the President/VP are on the same
                 page as far as "'links' between al Qaeda and Iraq".  op is
                 wrong.  What the media jumped on was, "no collaborative
                 relationship" -- the NY Times overstated this by writing
                 "No Iraq-Al Qaeda Tie" in its headline.
                 \_ Yes, Saddam didn't help plan 9/11.  But there /are/ links
                    between Al Queda and Saddam's Iraq.  This is the same big
                    lie that poeple tell WRT illegal immigration.  When people
                    demand that immigration laws are enforced, the demagogues
                    say "why do you hate immigrants!".  I'm tired of it.
                    -emarkp
                    \_ Ok, there is a link between al Qaeda and "Saddam's Iraq"
                       but it's not really fair to say that.  The cell remotely
                       linked with al qaeda was in Kurds autonomous region,
                       outside Saddam's control, protected by US of A.
                       \_ The only control Saddam didn't have was air power
                          over certain regions.  Since he didn't have an air
                          force that hardly matters.
                    \_ There are links between Al Queda and a whole bunch
                       of other countries. Even the United States is "linked"
                       to Al Queda. We armed them in the 80's. Heck, about
                       19 of them were in the United States as they committed
                       a horrible act three years ago. But we can't invade
                       every damn country that's "linked" to Al Queda.
                       \_ You've stretched reality beyond the breaking point.
                          If this was a class paper (outside the Sociology
                          department), you'd get an "F" for that line of
                          reasoning.
                       \_ [ delete my post and I get to delete yours ]
                       \_ Logical reasoning is so tiresome.
                       \_ Relevance?  Saddam was courting them /recently/.
                          Also, the links were more substantial than the mere
                          presence of Al Qaeda agents in Iraq.  And sign your
                          posts. -emarkp
                          \_ "courting them": gotta back this up, d00d.
                              \_ Here's a link for you:
                                 http://tinyurl.com/2q6x5 (upi.com)
                                 \_ You're several days late; the CIA believes
                                    those were two different people.  -tom
                                 \_ That's it? One dude in a low-level
                                    militia is your collaborative link
                                    between Iraq and Al Queda? Even
                                    Pakistan has high level nuclear
                                    scientists doing more collaborative
                                    work with them.
                                 \_ There are more countries have bigger ties
                                    with Al Queda.  Why attack Iraq?
                                    \_ Al Qaeda isn't the only terrorist
                                       organisation.
                                 \_ That link does not show "courting", fool.
                          \_ Hmm, Saddam gave Atta(?) a visa and trained him
                             as a pilot?
                          \_ Al Qaeda wanted Iraq as a safe haven and for WMD
                             development, and Saddam never responded.  This is
                             the no "collaborative relationship" result.
                             \_ We attacked Iraq because it refused to
                                collaborate with terrorists.
2004/6/24 [Uncategorized] UID:31001 Activity:nil
6/24    When seti@home is finished transitioning to BOINC, will they make
        a final update of each user's total "classic" work units, or will they
        just keep the snapshot taken on May 14th?
2004/6/24-26 [Computer/SW/Languages/Perl] UID:31002 Activity:moderate
6/24    I defined a function in Perl
          sub myPrint {
             &print;
          }
        And perl complains that it main::print is undefined.  How do I
        refer to the builtin print?
        \_ print;
           \_ But according to the camel book, &print; should pass the current
              @_ to print while print; does not (I have tried).
              \_ I don't believe that works for builtins
                 \_ Right, and it's deprecated even for functions.  Just
                    say what you mean: print @_;
                    \_ Isn't the whole spirot of PERL that there is > 1 way
                       to code what you want?
2017/09/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/22    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:June:24 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>