Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:October:15 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2004/10/15 [Transportation/Airplane] UID:34140 Activity:nil
10/14   I Can Fly (Mil Photos)
2004/10/15 [Health/Women] UID:34141 Activity:high
10/14   So I talked to a few women and my impression from them is that
        they don't really care to understand the actual issues/facts/
        figures. Nope. They're voting because they FEEL that one
        candidate seems smarter or another candidate seems kinder and
        down to earth. Ok I've gotten a LOT of women voters who want
        the kinder/down to earth Monkey in Command we have now. Can
        someone tell me why the fuck women's sufferage started and
        how in the world it ever got into our amendments?
                        -not troll, just a normal guy looking at facts
                         (oh, and on average, men ARE smart and base our
                          decisions on facts/figures. That's why we DESERVE
                          a bigger paycheck).
        \_ One can name quite a few presidents who never would
           have been elected without the female vote.  They are all Dem.
        \_ Hey neat, a liberal troglodyte!
        \_ I would argue that women have a better sense of knowing when
           they're getting fucked or when the guy is genuine.  They seem to
           be better at this then men, and they know it.
2004/10/15 [Politics/Domestic] UID:34142 Activity:nil
10/13   Republican donation site accepts $25, 50, 75, 100, and others
        but you can make a recurring donation every month. The min
        amount is $1.00. Democrat donation site accepts $25, 50, 100,
        250, 500, 1000, 2500, and others. No recurring donation but
        the min amount is $10. Comments?
2004/10/15 [ERROR, uid:34143, category id '18005#7.36125' has no name! , ] UID:34143 Activity:high
10/13   Swift Boat account from neither Democrats/Republicans-- the
        Vietnamese people. It's ABC news, conservative slant. Go figure:
        \_ Didn't I just post this below???
           \_ And you posted the more readable single-page version, too.
2004/10/15 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34144 Activity:nil
10/15   Richard Cohen of Washington Post gives GW Bush up for dead in
        campaign for President
        \_ Read section 3 of the 14th Amendment.
           \_ Freeper boy!  When'd they teach you about that constitution
              thang?  Wow!  Clever clever.  -John
2004/10/15-16 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:34145 Activity:very high
10/14   Yet more global warming fraud.  Is Dan Rather also
        an atmospheric scientist?
        Global Warming Bombshell
        This story was posted over a year ago, several times.
        \_ This is the *exact same bullshit* that you've already posted 10 or
           20 times; "analysis" by an oil company businessman (not a
           scientist) which, surprise surprise, shows what the oil companies
           want.  His objections have already been answered many times over.
           \_ I don't think you are familiar with the author of the article
              or paper in question.  This leads me to conclude you are
              not interested in science but in political agendas.  Enjoy
              your fantasy land.
              \_ I am quite familiar with McIntyre and McKitrick, because
                 you've posted references to their crap numerous times before.
                 You know, the crap that was rejected by peer review, and now
                 is seized upon by global warming naysayers as definitive
                 proof of...something.  (The paper doesn't say that global
                 warming doesn't exist, in fact its conclusion is that the
                 data being analyzed is essentially correct for this
                 century).  This leads me to conclude that you haven't read
                 the source papers or the arguments against it.  -tom
                 \_ Do you deny putting random data into Mann's model
                    produces hockey stick shapes?  Because that is exactly
                    what they've shown.  The rejection from Nature was
                    because their paper was 'too technical'.  What a joke.
                    \_ I would refer you to Mann's refutation, except you've
                       already decided to ignore it.  In any case, what
                       difference does it make?  McIntyre and McKitrick agree
                       that global warming is happening.  -tom
                       \_ What refutation - 2 paragraphs in Nature?
                          Mann does not address the issue above.  I've
                          also read the entire correspondence between
                          Mann and M&M, in which Mann comes off as
                          arrogant, deceitful, and all around very
                          suspicious.  I also agree that the globe has
                          warmed during the 20th century, primarily
                          during the first half.  This has nothing to
                          do with the fraudulent nature of Mann's paper
                          or sound science.  You expect countries to
                          adapt entire economies on this kind of science!?
                          Unbelievable and disgraceful.
              \_ using statistics to determine whether there is a trend
                 in global warming produces answers that only expert
                 statisticians can evaluate and understand. when a statician
                 says "the probability of a trend is X" he really implicitly
                 adds on "according to my model." there is a huge number of
                 design decisions involved in statistical analysis. these
                 design decisions are based on value judgments such as
                 whether a certain trend should be linear, whether a certain
                 variable is gaussian, etc. different judgments of this kind
                 can yield drastically different results. Statistics is
                 still black magic, and it is no substitute for applying the
                 good old fashioned precautionary principle. Statistics is
                 only significant if most stistical methods employed come up
                 with the same answer. So far, this has not been the case
                 with global warming. it's a total tossup.
                 \_ Then there's the fact that you can't use statistics
                    to figure out causal links, unless you either
                    (a) make causal assumptions to begin with, or
                    (b) do not only statistics (i.e. observations and
                    inference), but empirical science (i.e. experiments)
                    as well. -- ilyas, causal guy
                    \_ that's not true. there are rigorous definitions
                       of causality that permit statistical determination.
                       for example, look at Judea Pearl's book 'Causality'.
                       such definitions are intuitively appealing and more
                       rigorous than classical definitions of causality
                       that go back to Hume. my point above is that all of
                       statistics should be treated with suspicion, including
                       causality. however, assessing causlity is not
                       significantly more difficult to determine than
                       correlation (compared to the scope of the issues
                       i'm raising with stats).
                       \_ Heh.  You should read Judea's book more carefully.
                          For Judea, the graph embodies the causal assumptions.
                          Without the graph you just have the joint, and no
                          causality can come out from just the joint unless
                          you can experiment.  Causality and statistics are
                          fundamentally different.  Statistics is the
                          study of 'observations,' causality is the study of
                          'immutable laws,' or if you like of 'stability.'
                          Causality cannot be determined from just numbers,
                          because almost any set of numbers has multiple
                          consistent causal explanations (see 'identifiability
                          problem').  If you think determining causality
                          is a subset of statistics, ask any statistician
                          what he thinks about that. -- ilyas
           \_ Fascinating.  Muller was my Physics 7C professor, and has done
              some pretty interesting stuff (he was AFAIK the first to suggest
              the cometary impact model for dino extinction, but didn't follow
              up.  His mentor Louis Alvarez was more interested and George
              Alvarez--a geologist--did the follow-up to find the iridium
              layer, etc.).  Unfortunately, I now think he's a bit of a nut:
           Need I say anymore? This guy is a partisan.
           \_ Or a good evaluator of Bush's character.
        \_ Dan Rather is a 5-minute expert on everything.
           \_ Dan Rather is the Big Burrito!  -- Dan Rather #1 fan
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California, ERROR, uid:34146, category id '18005#25.256' has no name! , ] UID:34146 Activity:moderate
10/15   Republicans commit registration fraud in numerous states:
        \_ Dailykos... yes, the ultimate non-partisan quality news site.
           And you people delete links from the nuts at the freerepublic
           but think this is perfectly neutral and worth reporting?  Get it
           from a real news site and we'll discuss this and the number of
           dead people voting for the Democrats over the years.
           \_ No really, let's discuss it.  Do you have a single credible
              accusation?  Are you aware that as people die, new people replace
              them?  Are you aware that people move?  Are you aware that it
              takes time for registration numbers to reflect this (there is
              usually at least a 5 year time lag)?  There are TONS of legit
              reasons for the number of registereds to outnumber the number
              of eligibles.  As for the Republican operatives destroying
              Democratic registrations, there are links to legit news stories
              within that link.  However, you're simply dismissing it out of
              hand because it comes from a partisan site.  Here is some
              information from a "regular" news outlet about this:
     (yahoo news)
              Note that despite the headline, the only Republican accusations
              contained in the article are the vague notions about registereds
              and eligibles, which have a legit explanation.  The Democratic
              accusations are at times very specific.
              \_ Two words: Kennedy/Nixon.
                 \_ Funny thing is, Kennedy would have won even without
                    Illinois. And that was 40 years ago.
           \_ There are literally a dozen links to "legitimate" news
              from that url.
        \_ Block the Vote - Paul Krugman (Yahoo!)
           ... a firm hired by the Republican National Committee to register
           voters, told a Nevada TV station that their supervisors
           systematically tore up Democratic registrations.  The accusations
           are backed by physical evidence and appear credible.  Officials have
           begun a criminal investigation into reports of similar actions by
           Sproul in Oregon. Republicans claim ... Democrats do it, too.
           But there haven't been any comparably credible accusations
           against Democratic voter-registration organizations.
           Sproul in Oregon.  Republicans claim, of course, that they did
           nothing wrong - and that besides, Democrats do it, too.  But there
           haven't been any comparably credible accusations against Democratic
           voter-registration organizations.
           \_ Democrats don't have to do it.  They just need the votes to
              actually be counted.  There are a hell of a lot more D than R
              in the country.
              \_ If they don't register then they aren't anything.  How do
                 you figure that?  Anyway, I think you might be in for a big
                 surprise when 4 million of those hated Xtian fundies show up
                 this time who skipped the election in 2000.
                 \_ The count(D) > count(R) is for registered voters, as well
                    as voting voters, at least in presidential elections.  And
                    if you think the fundie vote wasn't out in force in 2000,
                    you're smoking something I don't want.
           \_ And the story came out on the day of registration deadlines...
           \_ The only thing I've ever seen with Democrats are vague accusations
              from Republicans about "more voters registered than eligible,"
              a classic case of confusing causation with correlation.
              Apparently they've never heard of population growth, people dying,
              moving, etc. etc.
           \_ Oops, I took a quote out of context by ellipsing too much.
              Repaired now.  Sorry!
              \_ Now it's even more out of context.  The quote is
                 "Republicans claim, of course, that they did nothing
                 wrong - and that besides, Democrats do it, too."  Mmm..
                 tasty tasty hypocrisy
                 \_ Shit, you're right.  I've fixed it completely now.
                    (BTW, it's not hypocrisy, it's called fucking it up twice
                    in a row.  The original was even more out of context.
                    The taste you note is from my ass.)
                    \_ I didn't mean you were hypocritical.  I was savoring
                       Krugman's phrase.
2004/10/15-16 [Health/Disease/General] UID:34147 Activity:high
10/15   Is the current flu vaccine shortage the result of too much government
        interference in the market or not enough government interference?
        \_ Too much incompetence in general, from both the government
           and private sectors.
        \_ I dunno, but it happened on Bush's watch, and I thought he was
           supposed to be on good terms with big drug companies.-partisan troll
        \_ The contamination happened in Britain, not here.
           \_ And the British Government shut down the American company's
              plant because <shock>they were actually doing their regulatory
              duty</shock>.  So now we get to try and shore up the supply
              with those vaccines from a third world coming through Canada.
        \_ I like how Bush kept referring to it as a British company... wasn't
           it Chiron... based in Emeryville?  (Yes, I know the particular
           _lab_ was in England)
           \_ Stop badmouthing our free-market solution to vaccinations! -gwb
        \_ Making vaccines is hard and the profit margin is thin. The US
           government doesn't push hard for taking flu shots so it's all
           free-market. For years, millions of shots were unused and tossed
           (no profit) and the FDA requires companies to pursue getting
           approval for making vaccines. So now only two companies make it
           for the US market and no one else is approved to provide the vaccine
           because companies decided not to seek FDA approval.
           \_ How many customers are there?  Can I get a flu shot if I am
              willing to pay more?  It doesn't seem like a free market
              to me.  Seems more like large entities with lots of
              bargaining power buy the vaccines and push down the price.
              \_ The companies have beat you to the punch.  They raised the
                 price 9-fold.  There are lines 5 hours long to get shots.
                 Massive fuckup.
2004/10/15-17 [Computer/SW/Mail, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/Ilyas] UID:34148 Activity:high
10/14   ok, WHO is fukcing w/ sendmail? load average is 80+ and there are
        100's of sendmail processes... same thing happend this morning at
        8am EDT. Someone just add some recursive procmail rule or some
        shit? This problem has been happening for a couple weeks but just
        got alot worse.                 - rory
        \_ also ps, is this normal?
           $ mailq | wc -l
           \_ no one responded to this... isnt this a ridiculously high
              number of messages to have queued on our system? w/ ~100
              users and a reasonable load?              - rory
              \_ Yes, it is.  Mail on soda ... is fucked.  No one currently
                 working on soda has the sendmail fu to fix this issue -
                 apparently it has something to do with forged headers
                 and virus emails.  It is not clear that the hardware plan
                 will fix the problem.  My advice is to use !soda for all
                 important email from now on.
        \_ I... want... an... upgrade...     -the soda machine
           \_ Faster hardware is not the answer to bad configurations or
              poor programming.  Unless you work for MS.
              \_ Soda's sendmail is completely fux0red.  I don't believe anyone
                 on current politburo knows how to unfux0r it.  Sendmail is
                 a dark art that has not been passed on to the younger
                 generation, apparently.  The new hardware will simply cause
                 the problem to expand to fill it.
                 \_ It's more that email in general is fux0red.  The sendmail
                    flurries are because of spam storms.  This is made worse
                    by rampant use of SA on a mainly user-centric box.  Offload
                    this task onto another server more or less dedicated to
                    mail handling and this problem will be mollified.
                    \_ I emailed pburo about this a while ago (I am sure the
                       others have also).  The response I got is that
                       'they are working on something.'  I was under the
                       impression they had a plan to offload spam filtering
                       to scotch or another machine or something.  I don't
                       think that's happening though. -- ilyas
                       \_ Yes, the plan is to move mail processing to scotch,
                          but that will not happen until we get a new scotch.
                          I am told that last time we tried moving over mail
                          processing to scotch (a Vectra), the poor machine
                          fell to its knees in no time.  The upgrade plan, as
                          it stands involves not only getting new hardware for
                          both soda and scotch, but moving the mail load over.
                          I know people are going to bitch and moan, but mail
                          processing needs to get off soda.  We're also going
                          to be adding email antivirus options (I think njh
                          has been poking around with ClamAV) to deal with the
                          plethora of attachment-rich virus email. - jvarga
                 \_ alright well what can we do about it? Dont alot more
                    people have root than who are in the politburo? Has
                    politburo come to by synonymous with "soda sys admins"?
                                Thank you for pointing that out _/
                        It was more of a question but thanks _/
                        for the snarky commentary
                    I know very little about sendmail... I'm guessing maybe
                    someone w/ access could look in the logs at when these
                    huge performance spikes are occurring? Is it a regular
                    time daily/weekly? Does it correspond w/ mail to a
                    \_ Rumor has it that it has something to do with virii and
                         "virii" is not a word.  The word you were _/
                         looking for is "viruses"
                       spoofed Reply-To: headers that aren't being properly
                       dealt with, but I know nothing for sure.
                    certain user? Does a procmail problem seem like a
                    certain user? Does procmail problem seem like a
                    possible candidate?                 - rory
                    \_ We are busy testing NFS. Thanx! -politburo!
                       \_ NFS for mailspools?  yeesh...
        \_ On the subject of mail, weren't people supposed to use spamc
           for spamassassin? I see a whole lot of "perl spamassassin" jobs.
           A conservative antivirus thing would be good. Also, on the scotch
           subject, is that "dual Xeon" choice just an imperial fiat? It
           doesn't seem to be under any debate (hint: use AMD).
           \_ No no, by all means, use Xeons.  It will be so fun when Soda
              melts a hole in the machine room wall.
              \_ Uh, yeah.  I own AMD stock and no Intel, but really.  Let's
                 be rational about this.
2004/10/15-16 [ERROR, uid:34149, category id '18005#6.81' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34149 Activity:nil 50%like:30258
10/15   Interesting poll analysis. Why the same poll can give you
        different numbers, depending on how you choose to look at it:
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34150 Activity:nil
        Strong support for Dubya and dislike of Kerry on this survey of
        servicemen and women and their families.  Note the strength of support
        when the breakdown is given for the soldiers only (not including
        family members).
        \_ I applaud the strenght and resolve our armed forces have in
           implementing free market reforms in Iraq.  Do they realize
           Paul Bremer thinks implementing a flat tax and reduction of
           tariffs are his main accomplishments in Iraq?  - danh
        \_ Military personnel in a non-draft military tend to be Republican.
           They also tend to favor strong military action over diplomatic
           solutions and sanctions.  Cf. military personnel support for
           Reagan over Carter.  On the other hand, would someone please explain
           to me how a survey of 655 service personnel accurately reflects
           trends in a military that now has over 200 times that number on
           duty in Iraq?
           \_ If your complaint is that they also need a survey for boots
              on the ground folks in Iraq, then it's warranted.  ... but, I
              don't see military higher-ups authorizing pansy election surveys
              while they're trying to fix Iraq.
              \_ I'm sorry, I just don't get the methodology that says that
                 the opinions of 655 people translates into an accurate picture
                 of all military personnel.  How does this work?
                 \_ Like any other poll, it's basic statistics.  You may wish
                    to consult the concepts of "sampling" and "margin of
                    error."  This is how any poll works.  That said, selecting
                    a representative sample is very difficult, and lots of
                    polling organizations get it wrong - even good ones.
                    c.f. Gallup's accuracy issues of late.
                    \_ Right, so I read up on Annenberg's methodology and the
                       basic stats page below.  My question then is how
                       accurately this reflects the views of the boots on the
                       ground, whether the same results hold true for
                       reservists currently on duty, and what questions were
                       asked, since the specific wording of the questions
                       could influence the results.  Kudos to the motd for
                       helping me to get a grip on this.
                       \_ Note your points were already brought up ...
                          three replies before your post.
           \_ How do polls of non-military citizens of 600-1200 meaningfully
              represent *millions* of people in a state if you're unwilling
              to allow the same 600+ to represent ~130k?
              \_ Sorry, not trying to be a troll, but genuinely curious. How
                 does this actually work?
                 \_ You may find this link helpful.  And oh yeah, obGoogle.
                    \_ thank you!
        \_ Is this the part where we're supposed to call them stupid and
           uneducated and braindwashed?
           \_ This is the part where we talk about yermom.
2004/10/15-16 [Uncategorized] UID:34151 Activity:nil
10/15   Hey, the picture of the brick wall looks like a keyboard!
        \_ I just burst out laughing over a big bomb going off.  Going to
        \_ nice!
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34152 Activity:very high
10/15   Most interesting "Doonesbury discovers URLs" yet:
        (Source URL for Dubya's hometown paper endorsing Kerry)
        \_ Seriously, stop posting this crap. If you continue to
           do this I'll change your links to porn sites.
           \_ I find it kind of interesting.  It's not blatantly offensive and
              could lead to a nice little flamewar so why should you censor it?
        \_ Fascinating piece on the responses the paper has received on this:
           \_ We are on the road to civil war.  If Bush wins this election,
              I am buying an AK-47 and training in its use, and moving to
              a  low population-density state in anticipation of the coming
           \_ If you actually read all the letters they got, they ran at
              least 4:1 in support.
                \_ That's not fair! People who support Bush are much, much
                   less likely to possess the ability to write a letter.
2004/10/15-16 [Computer/SW/Languages/Perl] UID:34153 Activity:nil
10/15   In Perl, what does
        $| = 1;
        \_ Flush write buffers after every write
        \_ Flush write buffers after every write -scotsman
           \_ why the strange syntax?
              \_ There are many perl switch varibles.  There are also named
                 aliases for almost all of them.  read the perlvar manpage
                 for some mnemonic help -scotsman
              \_ Perl has no other kind. -- ilyas
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34154 Activity:nil
10/15   Nader's former running-mate endorses Kerry: []
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:34155 Activity:high
10/15   From an AP article about possible election nightmare scenarios:
        'Another quirk involves "faithless electors," who refuse to cast their
        electoral votes for the person chosen by their state's voters. This
        rarely happens - only 10 times in history - but even one this year
        could be critical. And one of the five Republican electors from West
        Virginia is holding out the possibility of withholding his vote for
        Bush if the president carries the state.'

        Excuse me, but WTF.  If this isn't a great argument for junking this
        ridiculous and outmoded system, I don't know what is.
        \_ The system was designed to prevent the common people from choosing
           the president.  As we saw in 2000, the system works!
           \_ This should not be a partisan issue.  As the rogue West Virginian
              elector shows, this could break against the President just as
              easily at it could break towards him.  Sadly, I think the only
              scenario that would create enough of a real push to fix the
              system would be Kerry losing in the popular vote but winning
              the electoral vote.  The inverse would simply be status quo.
              \_ I think it's not a partisan issue of Rep vs. Dem so much
                 as politician vs. voter.  Politicians love this system
                 because they only have to campaign in certain parts of the
                 country, and can strategize accordingly.  Without the electoral
                 college, both candidates would actually have to campaign in
                 california, texas, new england and the south.  This would
                 obviously be in the best interests of everyone but the
                 soccer moms in ohio who now hold complete control over the
                 nation as far as voters go, but would be a big pain in the
                 ass for politicians.
                 \_ It would also make things like instant runoff voting much
                    more necessary.  Proportional electoral representation
                    would also greatly change the dynamics of 3rd parties.
              \_ Part of the problem is that you would have to find a
                 system that breaks slightly in favor of small states like
                 the current one does.  Otherwise it will just never be
                 \_ You could keep electoral votes but make each state's EVs
                    be distributed according to popular vote in that state.
                    (Like the Colorado measure)  If only a few states do this
                    it diminishes their importance but if they all did it it
                    would be a level playing field.
                    \_ This doesn't address the "faithless elector" problem.
                       Can you imagine the shitstorm if the electoral college
                       is tied, and that W.Virginian elector switches his Bush
                       vote to Kerry?
                       \_ Sure it could.  The state could just specify by
                          statute the way in which an elector must vore.  Any
                          faithless electors are acting in violation of state
                          law and get replaced.
                       \_ You could just get rid of the electors and make
                          the electoral votes be directly based on what
                          was voted in the state.
        \_ The large/small state balance is included in constitutional
           amendments as well.  You're never going to convince 75% of the state
           legislatures to pass it.  Stop talking about reforming the EC.  This
           was a boogeyman raised in 2000 and it didn't matter then either.
           \_ So your attitude is, "The system is fucked and a minority wants
              it to stay fucked, so piss off."  As I recall, there have been
              over 20 Constitutional amendments over the years to correct
              various problems, and those have passed.
              \_ Ummm... Perhaps I should point out that it's only
                 "fucked" from the perspecitve of the big states.  I don't
                 know how you'd convince the smaller states that getting
                 screwed up the butt by CA is good for them, but you're
                 welcome to try. -!pp
                 \_ Let's extend your logic to state elections.  Why should we
                    have majority elections for electing the governor?  After
                    all, the populated areas of the state could "screw over"
                    the less populated parts.  By your logic, we should have
                    an electoral college to give people in the unpopulated
                    parts proportionally more voting power.  And why not
                    take it further, to the local level?  After all, my block
                    doesn't have as many people in it, but do I want those
                          \_ Laws are only correct or incorrect when they are
                             stating a fact, like declaring Pi=22/7.
                    people in the Sunset picking my Mayor and screwing me?
                    Give me more representation!
                    \_ Wow, your whole thesis is based on a fallacy of
                       \_ The idea that "Wyoming" needs representation is
                          itself a fallacy.  The state of Wyoming has no
                          concern at all with terrorism, for example, yet
                          it's one of the biggest supporters of Bush's
                          policies.  -tom
                          \_ Heh, "I'm smarter than you, so let me vote
                             for you."
                             \_ uh, no.  Value of person in Wyoming =~ value
                                of person in CA.  Value of vote in Wyoming
                                =~ 5 * value of vote in CA.  That's bullshit,
                                period.  -tom
                                \_ So move to Wyoming and stop bitching.
                                   Equating this with 'person value' is
        \_ I would rather reform Gerrymandering.
        \_ I would rather reform voter fraud, ie. bring back DMV
           voter registration.
           \_ Bring back?
2004/10/15-16 [Uncategorized] UID:34156 Activity:nil
10/15   Anyone know if Fry's sells any case noise dampening material? thx
2004/10/15-16 [Recreation/Dating] UID:34157 Activity:insanely high
10/14   How do I politely tell this girl that, I can help you with
        the class/hw, but you have to ....? Or stop bugging me!!
                                      \_ Finish my sentences for me?
        \_ There's no polite way to do it.  The only "polite" thing
           to do is tell her you're weary of helping her.  Period.
           \_ Is there a way to play it so that I actually get what
              I want? Anyone in the same boat with success stories?
              She's definitely not bad looking, so I don't mind helping
              her at all, as long as I can get maybe some gfe alone the
              way. ;)
              \_ Give me her number, it's obvious you don't have the balls
                 to take this girl out. Here's a hint from people with
                 actual experience, girls don't like overly "nice" guys,
                 if you don't believe me ask one. It makes a guy look needy
                 and desperate. Anyway, I doubt you have a chance with her
                 because you already let the statute of limitations of
                 being more than friends run out. You should've asked her out
                 after the second or third time you helped her out, not
                 after the 20th.
              \_ Why don't you, uh, ask her out? If she says no then
                 forget it and stop helping her.
              \_ If you can't get the GFE in the absence of helping her, you
                 won't be able to get GFE when you do help her.  The best you'd
                 be able to hope for is strung along.  OTOH, if you think she'd
                 be into you even without the tutoring, then by all means ask
                 her out.
              \_ "gfe"?
                 \_ Smelly Geek-speak for 'GirlFriend Experience"
                    \_ Actually, it's not.  It's a term used in a much wider
                       circle than amongst the stereotyped geek.
                       \_ oh, come on. non-geeks rarely use acronymns in
                          normal speech.
                          \_ You're wrong, or your definition of geek is far
                             too liberal.
                       \_ Help her and analyze whether she is an evil
                          bitch or not.  If she is, then abandon her at
                          a key moment (before midterm etc).  If she is
                          reasonable, see where things go.
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:34158 Activity:nil
10/14   Here is an idea. We all know that Bay Area is one of the most
        liberal places on the West Coast and right wing policians don't
        even bother talking to us. How about a a concept of a bunch of
        underground liberals, say, in the millions, declaring themselves
        as Republicans and even answering polls that show that they
        support Republicans. This will trick the enemy thinking that
        we could actually be a swing state hence wasting money convincing
        us to vote right. Come the election, these underground
        liberals can come out and vote for the Democrats and really
        fuck up the Republicans. Theoretically, does this plan work,
        and in practice, can the plan be executed successfully?
        \_ Secret and Millions of people are mutually exclusive.
           \_ shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!
2004/10/15-16 [Uncategorized] UID:34159 Activity:nil 50%like:35845
10/15   Can someone please recommend a good, low-cost web hosting
        company? TIA.
2004/10/15-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:34160 Activity:high
10/15   Oh look, Republicans are cheating again:
        Why can't they just let the electorate vote fair and square?
        \_ Simple.  They have God on their side, so every action
           they take in defense of God's Will is justified.  Get it?
        \_ Ask the Dems the same thing about the military vote.
           \_ Mrf?  And when do two wrongs make a right anyway?  Jail 'em all!
2004/10/15-18 [ERROR, uid:34161, category id '18005#9.15375' has no name! , , Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34161 Activity:very high
10/14   Michael Dell and Jim Barksdale endorse Bush. I hope their
        companies die die die. Buy a Dell computer, support the Bush Dynasty.,15704,724369,00.html
        \_ What did you expect? Dell Computer is based in Texas.
        \_ A big business endorsing a Republican?  Shocking!!  My last computer
           was a new Dell, and my next one will be one too.
        \_ Are you going to swear to kill them and their families now?
           \_ no, I'm not a gun/NRA fanatical Republican, like the ones that
              planned, masterminded, and proceeded w/ the assassination of JFK
              \_ Cool, you not only have nothing to say, you proceed to tin
                 foil the whole place.  I love it.  Carry on, Comrade!
              \_ nice threadjack, but maybe i should reserve this comment for
              \_ jfk was killed in retaliation for bay of pigs. Besides,
                 jfk should never have been president anyway, his dad
                 cheated and had dead people vote which prevented the
                 rightfully elected man, Nixon, from taking office.
                 \_ How's that tin foil suit treating you?
                        \_ Its a joke. Kids these days.
                    \_ The bay of pigs part is tin foil.  The latter part is
                       accepted by a great many as true and has a high
                       probability of being true.  Careful where you spray
                       the tinfoil.  Some things are actually true or are
                       at least a reasonably thing to think even if you
                       personally disagree or don't want them to be.
                       \_ Regardless of its truth (or whether Kennedy really
                          would not have won without Illinois), I find it
                          amusing that this is STANDARD freeper talking point
                          that is supposed nullify massive Republican vote
                          \_ Dems do it every year where they control the
                             polls.  Reps do it where they control the polls.
                             To say one side or the other is always angelic
                             and the other side is always satanic is simply
                             naive, childish and koolaid drinkerish.
                             \_ I don't give a shit which side is defrauding
                                voters.  ANYONE caught doing this, REGARDLESS
                                of party affiliation should be spending time
                                in prison, with their patron organization
                                getting the living shit sued out of it.  Making
                                this into a partisan issue EITHER WAY rather
                                misses the point.
2004/10/15-18 [Computer/Networking] UID:34162 Activity:moderate
10/15   I need to replace my cordless phone.  I want to stick with 900MHz
        because I've heard 2.4 GHz commonly interferes with 802.11b.  I'd like
        2 handsets.  Any recommendations?  The Uniden ones appear to be static
        \_ I recently bought a great Uniden 5.8ghz phone from fry's for
           I think $60. It sits about 4 ft from my 802.11b AP and they
           both work perfectly fine.
        \_ Panasonic.
           \_ Hell no! They still use memory-affected Ni-Cd rechargeable
              batteries. BTW AT&T and Uniden are the same.
           \_ Why don't you want a 5.8 ghz phone? I recenty bought a
              5.8 ghz Panasonic phone "system" from Fry's. It was $119
              - $20 MIR and the extra handset was $79. It doesn't interfere
              w/ my 802.11{b,g} clients.
              \_ Had heard 5.8GHz were still a problem.  What phone model is
                 \_ Panasonic KX-TG5240:
2004/10/15-18 [Uncategorized] UID:34163 Activity:moderate
10/15   mailq |wc -l
        \_ down to 19090 now...lets see how my queue runners play (-njh)
        \_ btw,  - !rory
           (just so noone thinks I'm the only one bitching about this)
           (just so no one thinks I'm the only one bitching about this)
2019/07/24 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:October:15 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>