Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:September:11 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2004/9/11-12 [Reference/Military] UID:33471 Activity:very high
9/10    is it true that police deaths from assault weapons have
        gone down significantly since the assault weapons ban
        10 years ago?  thanks. - danh
        \_ This is a statistic listed on, which I have
           no reason to doubt.  My problem is that they don't report other
           interesting statistics like:
           (a) how many police were actually killed by assault weapons
           (b) In what percentage of crimes were assault weapons used
           (c) how many police deaths involving non-assault weapons were
               caused by the ban (by making the criminals choose some other
               weapon), and so on.
           In short, what I feel is missing from this ban, and a lot of
           legislation in general, is a comprehensive study of actual effects
           of the legislation.  Bans are a restriction of liberty and merit
           much more serious deliberation than I feel they are being given.
             -- ilyas
             \_ based on the number of posts you have made in the last 24 hours,
                i command you to read this:
                \_ I d do some work, but I ve been sick. -- ilyas
           \_ did police deaths by assault weapon go down dramatically
              after the sort of assault weapons ban or not?  i guess
              we'll know more about the direct correlation in a year!
              \_ Did you read the url?  Did you read the reply?  Do you know
                 how to read?
        \_ is it just banning fully automatic? If so, it is useless because
           you can't aim a fully automatic anyways due to recoils
           \_ but you can go nuts with it in a crowded school playground!
           \_ Full-auto/3-rd burst are class III weapons anyways. Need
              to be SOT to get one. This ban was NOT a ban on assault
              weapons. But on semi-auto rifles that looked "evil."
              \_ or anything where you fire more than one shot for
                 each trigger pull.
           \_ whoah, good point!  You better alert all the militaries in the
              world about that.
              \_ In the marine sniper school there hangs a plaque listing
                 bullets-spent/kill for normal soldiers (a few hundred
                 thousand) vs snipers (1.3).
                 \_ I'm glad you pointed that out. Now what is a MOA?
                    Better yet, tell me your exp. in the armed forces?
                       Now tell me your exp. being a know-nothing sysadmin
                       who likes to pontificate about politics.
2004/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33472 Activity:very high
9/11    Happy 9/11 Anniversary! Or, maybe not so happy, I don't know...
        "I want justice. And there's an old poster out West, I recall, that
        says, 'Wanted: Dead or Alive.'"
        [President Bush, on Osama Bin Laden, 09/17/01]

        "I don't know where he is.You know, I just don't spend that much time
        on him... I truly am not that concerned about him."
        [President Bush, Press Conference, 3/13/02]
        \_ I am glad you like to edit his speeches because he is so
           difficult to understand.
        \_ You do realize his sentiments simply reflected pretty much that
           of the American public, at the time.  Taking quotes out of context
           won't make a bush voter vote kerry.
2004/9/11-12 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:33473 Activity:very high
9/11    I've got a Windows 2000 machine with a 10GB disk. I've got
        a new fast 80GB disk, and I'd like to copy the whole
        windows installation from one disk to the other.
        Any recommendations on how to do this?
        Is linux fdisk and dd the right solution?
        \_ WooOOOOooooOOOooo!!! Use GhoooOOOooooOOoost!!!
        \_ Norton Ghost is the way to go ... Is it happy with all-NTFS yet?
        the version I've got can copy NTFS to and from FAT32 but not NTFS,
        since it's running on DOS.  I only mention this because I think FAT32
        conks out at 32 Gb? Someone please correct ...
           \_ FAT32 does not conk out at 32GB, however, W2k conks out trying
              to create FAT32 >32GB.  It's not a limitation of FAT32, but a
              W2k bug.  You can create FAT32 partition greater than 32GB even
              with FreeBSD.  W2k will read it just fine, too.  It just can't
              create it.  Talk about software quality control.
        \_ Most versions of Ghost should handle it just fine, using
           disk-to-disk.  It can't put the image file (*.gho) onto an NTFS
           partition, but it can restore the image to an NTFS partition.
           I believe linux "dd" might also be a solution (say, using a Knoppix
           live CD and dup'ing disk to disk).  But I've never tried it.
        \_ FAT16 conks out at 2GB...
           \_ the current disk has one 10GB NTFS partition. -op
                \_ Then ghost disk-to-disk is your best bet.
2004/9/11-12 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:33474 Activity:high
9/11    Hi soda losers.  I had my panties in a bunch worrying about Dubya
        ruling for the next four years, but I'm now in the middle of Cat's
        Cradle (book) and learning to not worry so much.  Thanks, bye!
        "There's nothing there!"
        \_ Why is the GWB censor afraid of the truth? Oh, yeah, he's
           a liar, a cheat, and an idiot.
2004/9/11-12 [Science/Electric, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:33475 Activity:insanely high
9/11    Is it practical to have, say, a large portion of CA or AZ running
        on solar power? My coworker runs his entire household via solar
        and it got me to wondering what would happen if everyone did this.
        Obviously industrial plants need more power, but could we do away
        with a lot of our polluting plants if everyone went solar? If so,
        then why don't we? What are the technological obstacles, if any?
        \_ My car runs on solar energy. It harnesses the solar energy
           collected over millions of years and dug up by some guys
           in the Middle East to be transported and refined.
        \_ One word: Cost.  For your typical house, you'll use about 400
           kilowatts/hour per month (4800 per year).  You will need a
           system capable of producing about 3K Watts/hour to meet that
           demand (realworld figure is about 1.7K kilowatt hour produce per
           year per 1K watt of solar panel here in CA).  The cost to acquire
           and install a 3K system is about $20K (this is with a $3 per watt
           rebate from CA already).  If you buy your electricity from your
           CA utility it costs about $0.17 / kilowatt.  The return will
           be about 15-20 years.  This does not include the cost of money
           for the initial $20K!
           \_ I agree that cost makes solar impractical for almost everyone,
              but your abuse of units is causing me physical pain.
              kilowatts/hour per month?  energy per time to the third?
              $0.17/ kilowatt?  you think they charge by power not energy?
              I'm guessing you're someone who basically knows what they're
              talking about about solar, but is careless with units.
              google now does dimensional analysis for you. use it.
           \_ Economy of scale would drive these prices down; it makes sense
              for State/City government buildings to install the tech first
              to prove it feasible and efficient.
              \_ How about we prove it first, then install? -- ilyas
              \_  bullshit.  silcon solar cells are not new technology
                  and they've already been shown to be not economical
                  for most applications.  wasting taxpayer dollars will
                  not change this.  I'm guessing you're actually a libertarian
                  troll who know this.
                  \_ Your anger betrays you.  Take a deep breath and remember
                     your basic economics.

        \_ For heating stuff, yes. For powering everything else in your
           home like the fridge, computer, TV, etc., probably not. It takes
           a lot of surface area (even at 100% efficiency) to produce
           that much electrical energy.
           \_ My coworker powers everything in his house via solar, even
              his A/C. The surface area is surprisingly small. Very little
              of the roof is covered in panels - maybe 4'x8'.
              \_ He must:
                 a) have maaaaagical solar panels
                 b) use less power than a 1bdrm apt.
        \_ Expensive.
           \_ My coworker will break even in 7-8 years. If every new
              residence was mandated to be solar then in a decade the
              owners would be in the black. In the long-run it is
              \_ There was a /. article recently on plastic
                 solar panels, which are apparently a lot cheaper than
                 current ones. -- ilyas
              \_ Pollution, replacement needs, seasonal.
                 \_ The batteries need to be replaced, but I am accounting
                    for those costs. It isn't seasonal in places like CA
                    and AZ. Even an overcast sky is fine.
                    \_ It's not seasonal ... until those times when it just
                       rains for a while, and you are suddenly without power.
                       Being without power sucks.
                        \_ That's why we have an electric grid
        \_ It makes too much sense. -GWB ps: buy more oil and coal for
           my energy buddies.
           \_ Solar didn't exist prior to GWB admin?
           \_ The oil protection adventure in Iraq has already cost $2000
              for every household in the US (assuming avg household of 4,
              $200B/375M) ... That could have paid for at least solar water
              heating for the entire country.
        \_ There's a lot of toxic by products involved in creating the solar
           panels.  The batteries are toxic of course also.  10-15% efficiency
           is considered very good in the real world, so forget the 100% thing.
           And finally, the panels need to be replaced so often your pay off is
           really more like 50-75 years.
           \_ At which point it's just better to just wait until better tech
              comes along.  But let's not let facts get in the way, let's
              \_ Are you ilyas, or do you merely subscribe to his newsletter?
              \_ With this attitute, our air pollution would rival China's
                 and our cars would still be getting 10MPG.  We are in the
                 beginnings of a natural gas shortage, and we
                 need to switch to alternatives or sit waist deep in nuclear
                 waste.  You don't need to have batteries if you are connected
                 to the grid, that lowers the price considerably.  You can
                 also just do solar water heating which has a very quick
        \_ My parents have solar panels that just power the pool. We don't
           use the pool much, so we probably wouldn't pay to keep the thing
           heated all the time, but since the upfront cost has already been
           paid for, it's easy to keep the pool warm.
        \_ Solar make sense in some area where 1. population is dense and 2.
           AC is required in the summer.  Why?  cuz AC is very inefficient andif
           you got a lot of people using it, the peak power consumption is
           crazy.  So, Mid-Atlantic area such as New York and Washington DC are
           ideal places for Solar power, not California metro.
           Another problem.  Solar power generated in the household can't sell
           back to the grid.  If it could, then, the ROI will be much better.
           People are toying around the idea of using excess solar power to
           produce hydrogen, which might be an intermediate solution before
           power generated by normal household can be sell  back to the grid.
           \_ The lies and mistruths perpetuated here are ridiculous. You
              *can* sell your power back to the grid. My coworker has done
              this in some years. It does not cost $20K after rebates and
              incentives and break-even *is* about 7-8 years. He can power
              everything in his entire household. (He does have a gas
              dryer.) Rain doesn't matter, because the batteries hold a
              lot of energy - at least, not the rain we get in CA and AZ.
              After seeing his success, I wish to try it and I was
              wondering why this isn't mandated. Is there a technological
              \_ You are an idiot.  It isn't mandated because we don't live in
                 a fucking planned economy.
                 \_ Um, and we don't allow coal-stacks in residential
                    neighborhoods why?
                    \_ Were Berkeley students always this weak on logic or
                       is this a recent development?
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:September:11 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>