| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/Languages/Perl, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:34742 Activity:low |
11/7 Is there a shell command that will unsort (randomize) a file,
like the way sort does on a line-by-line basis? I don't need any
mathematical randomizing, just want to mix up my input lines
occasionally. tia.
\_ ~mconst/bin/shuffle
\_ i have some short code to do this. if the file is "large" [+32k ll]
it's somewhat tricky to do ... need a good random generator.
like perl's default doenst have enough seed values. why do
people ask stuff like this anonymously? --psb
\- this looks really slow to me:
/bin/time ./rand-mconst.pl < /tmp/infile > /dev/null
real 46.9
/bin/time ./rand-psb.pl < /tmp/infile > /dev/null
real 4.3
\_ What do you expect? One's an algorithm, one's a one line
hack.
\_ my stupid shell script that works fine for small files:
#!/bin/sh
awk 'BEGIN { srand() }{ print rand(),$0 }' $1 \
|sort|sed 's/^[^ ]* //'
\-I dont think this is portable to "classic awk" ... but
gawk is probably good enough. --psb
\- btw, i just stumbled, er shuffled, on to:
perldoc -q shuffle --psb |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:34743 Activity:nil |
11/7 What are some good unrar programs on unix to use?
\_ /usr/ports/rar , /usr/ports/unrar -John
\_ http://www.rarlab.com/rar_add.htm |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:34744 Activity:very high |
11/8 Religion of peace, though they look like La Raza
Jihad at San Francisco State
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15855
\_ All of these kids are definitely eligible for the Alec Baldwin
\_ Hey, I'm not the one complaining about every little thing
that's wrong in the U.S. I didn't agree with the Iraq war,
but then I don't agree with a lot of things that the
government does. Does that mean I bitch and moan about
it all day and threaten to leave? No, because for all
its fault the U.S. isn't like a really horrible place to
life. If you think that, hey, you can leave, and I'm
willing to help defray your cost for leaving. Seems
logical to me. So what's your beef? -williamc
\_ So every time someone bitches and moans about it, you're
going to bitch and moan about them bitching and moaning?
Get a grip, son. Let them vent their frustration without
adding to the useless din.
Pledge Fund. I say we pool our money together and send the
\_ Well, nobody is forcing anybody out of the country, but
a lot of people have expressed that they do want to leave,
so why not help them? Seems pretty damn logical to me.
I mean, if someone keeps complaining about the food in a
restaurant, then why do you keep coming back to it? It's not
like you HAVE to eat there. That's the wonderful concept of
free will. If you don't like it, you can leave. If you don't
like the U.S. and you're saying that everything sucks, then
there's like a whole other world to live in. So my question
is, why are you still here if you complain about it so much?
-williamc
\_ You know what, you're right. Then again, the whole
concept of a free society is that you have the right to
try and change the things you don't like, and to mouth
off about that as much as you want, without people telling
you "if you don't like it, why not just leave?" Note that
I use "right" not in its constitutional sense, but rather
in the common sense (as in "I have the right to not have
to deal with blithering morons.") -John
\_ Uhm yeah. I think very few people that actually say this
really want to do that; it's an expression of the general
turmoil in the nation. The fact that you need this pointed
out to you is kind of sad.
Palestinians back to Palestine and the rest to Canada.
-williamc
\_ William, I'm sure the ABPF would benefit greatly if you pledged
to go with the exiles.
\_ Hey, I'm not the one complaining about every little thing
that's wrong in the U.S. I didn't agree with the Iraq war,
but then I don't agree with a lot of things that the
government does. Does that mean I bitch and moan about
it all day and threaten to leave? No, because for all
its fault the U.S. isn't like a really horrible place to
life. If you think that, hey, you can leave, and I'm
willing to help defray your cost for leaving. Seems
logical to me. So what's your beef? -williamc
\_ Will, first of all you're perpetuating a myth that makes
leftie celebs like Alex Baldwin look like idiots. Stop.
They don't need any help doing that. Second, the last
thing this country needs is lib-flight to the Great White
North; contrary to what ppl post on freep, we _need_ an
opposition here (including you, apparently), so stop
trying to buy tickets for people and start convincing
them to take up the fight right here.
\_ Well, I can't vouch for leftie celebs, I don't know
them. But if they make stupid statements like "I
will leave the country if XYZ gets elected" then
I call them like I see them. I generally have a low
opinion of most celebs, as I've worked in Hollywood
for a limited time and wasn't impressed with the
people in the system. I completely concur that we
need an opposition, and although I'm a fiscal
conservative I respect others for having a different
opinion. What I don't like is the defeatist attitude
that seems to pervade the left. The reason why
the conservatives (and in california I am pretty
much a conservative by context, although I have
no great love of fundementalism or creationism and
I do believe gay people should have rights) is that
we (meaning the conservative people that I associate
with on a daily basis who have similar beliefs as I
do) seem to have a more "can do" attitude. Maybe it's
because we've worked for what we have. Maybe it's
just that conservatives have faith in their religion
or themselves or both. Whatever it is, the left is
just shooting themselves in the foot because they
don't attract people like myself and my friends.
The radical agenda of the left is just so off
putting and defeatist. If the left wants to win
then stop whining and start putting up. Fight the
creationists, fight the anti-choice proponents,
fight the racists, fight ignorance. But if you
on the left continue to expound defeatist attitudes,
if you on the left fail to come together and find
resolve, then you are a truly doomed party. The
democratic party just doesn't reach out to people
in the middle anymore, and it gives off the impression
of liberal elitism that nobody is impressed with.
In addition, if I respect your views although they
are different from mine, I expect you to do the same
for me, and I have found very little tolerance from
the liberals for my conservative views on certain
subjects. That just makes me NOT want to deal with
whiny defeatist liberals. If you're going to leave,
then leave.
-williamc
\_ Okay, look. The dems just lost a very acrimonious,
potentially impactful election. If you think that
whining and 'defeatist attitude' is unique to the
Dems, then either you're blinding yourself, or
you're too young to remember Clinton's reelection.
As for the absurd generalization that 'lefties are
defeatest', I've worked and associated with both
sides and have found alot of that can-do attitude
(that you allege is only extant on the R side) on the
D side as well. I've also found alot of rabidly
hostile and absurdly destructive whininess from the
R side. Your one sided experience doesn't say so
much about the D/left side to me as it does about
your objectivity. Deporting people because they're
upset isn't very can-do, IMO -- it's petulant and
stinks of puerile 'tit-for-tat'. Either put up and
figure out how to address their problems and find a
way to make it work, or stop being part of the
problem by injecting more emotion and invective
into the mix. Your attitude in this matter heavily
undermines your assertion about 'can-do-on-the-right'
btw. -POC
\_ Again, you are making sweeping assumptions about
what is stated. First off, I made no suggestion
that ANYBODY be deported. Deportation is the
forceful removal of individuals from this country.
I advocate no such thing. I merely say unto those
who state that they will leave the country for
greener pastures if so-and-so is elected that
they put their money where their mouth is and
follow through with their pledges. Second, I have
had extensive experience dealing with liberals,
having been involved as an ASUC senator for a year.
Basically everyone in Berkeley politics is pretty
far out liberal and there are very few middle of
the roaders or strict conservatives. The experience
has merely been reinforced in the "real world."
As for "tit-for-tat", it appears that YOU are
the one with the beef, not me. I have already
stated that I respect others right to differing
viewpoints, and I would welcome the input of those
on the opposite side of the fence. I have never
been and never will be a strict conservative or a
strict liberal. They are merely stupid labels
for the mentally incapable which you apparently
appear to be. Your defense of liberal defeatism
is also exceedingly weak. Boohooo, you lost the
election. Get over it, stop being acrimonious
because it's not working. It hasn't worked for
the past 10 years. Yes, both parties are at
fault for being acrimonious. I was there when
Limbaugh was king of radio, I was there when
Lewinsky-gate developed, I was there during the
Dole debates, hell, I was there when when Dukakis
stuck his head out of the tank. I was even
there when Geraldine Ferraro was running for VP.
So don't make assumptions that you can't back.
The point is that neither left nor right has
all the answers, and it is important to learn
how to work together on issues. So, stop being
so politically devisive yourself, stop pandering
to the leftist dogma or the the rightist dogma,
start using reason and common sense to come to
policy, stop towing the party line, and start
owning up to your words. All I ask is that
people do what they say and say what they
do, and all I can say is that from my experience
the moderates and conservatives seem a lot less
flaky to owning up to their words. -williamc
\_ Actually, I'm calling you a hypocrite, an
accusation which you've largely substantiated.
ASUC senate isn't representative of anything
real, as anybody with half a brain would
(or should, at any rate) know. Yes: neither
side as all the answers, but from your rhetoric
it seems rather hard to believe that you
actually ascribe to that, rather than using it
as a lever to gain the moral highground. Yes,
let's work together on the issues and stop
bandying about such absurdly undescriptive
binary labels as 'liberal' or 'conservative'.
It's interesting that, despite all your avowals
of moderate objectivism, you STILL continue to
inject divisiveness even as you assert your
superiority and ability not to be subject to
it. I never defended the left's whininess,
which you'd have realized if you were paying
attention; I pointed out that it's NOT UNIQUE
to the left, counter to your earlier
assertions. The point should be obvious,
namely that being in denial of this fact only
shows that you're likely part of the problem.
Again, if you'd been paying attention to
anything I said, you'd have also noted that I
was pretty clear about referencing that I've
seen positive attitude on BOTH sides, as well
as negative. I suspect that both sides are
very large populations of people, and asserting
any facile generalization about behavior to
one side or the other is, at best, self-
serving. Perhaps this conversation would best
be continued offline, since it's clear we're
just going to be wasting bits here. -POC
\_ YEAH! USA! #1! If you don't like it, get the fuck out! -John
\_ Well, nobody is forcing anybody out of the country, but
a lot of people have expressed that they do want to leave,
so why not help them? Seems pretty damn logical to me.
I mean, if someone keeps complaining about the food in a
restaurant, then why do you keep coming back to it? It's not
like you HAVE to eat there. That's the wonderful concept of
free will. If you don't like it, you can leave. If you don't
like the U.S. and you're saying that everything sucks, then
there's like a whole other world to live in. So my question
is, why are you still here if you complain about it so much?
-williamc
\_ Dude, relax, it's not like any of them will have jobs beyond
"sales executive" after graduating from college. -John
\_ ...which is likely to mean they'll cause more trouble rather
than less.
\_ Erm, picture Al Bundy rioting. -John
\_ I think there was a labor day episode about that.
And the beer tax episode. In fact, Al Bundy riots
a fair amount. -- ilyas
\_ a joke?
\_ THE AMERICAN LEFT HAS NO HISTORY OF VIOLENCE!
\_ Boohoo, I got slapped by a 98 pound woman. I am going to cry
and whine about how I am oppressed!
\_ You go/went to a university where a guy can get busted because
some woman 'feels' you oppressed her but it's ok for her to
slug you and then jump you? Okey dokey! No double standard
there! Good thinking! Is it ok if she knifes you? Clubs
you? Shoots you? You're a knucklehead.
\_ She did not slug the guy or jump him or stab him
or shoot him, she slapped him. Stick to reality please.
And you are a pussy if you think being slapped by a
woman is a big deal.
woman is a big deal. My guess is that you have never
been in a real fight or slapped by a real woman ever
in your life.
\_ She jumped him and had to have 3 cops pull her off.
If that is a-ok with you because it was a woman hitting
a man then please join william's org and find a new
country where it is ok to abuse someone because of
their gender and blame the victim and call the victim
names. If it was a conservative woman, say Ann Coulter,
who hit a liberal guy, say you(!!!) then you'd be
screaming bloody murder and pressing every charge in
the book. Hypocrite.
\_ Uh, no, actually if it was AC I'd happily beat the
living shit out of her and claim self-defense. Oh
wait...I just proved ilyas point, huh? Damn, I
better stop and reexamine myself or something.
\_ 1) "a noisy and menacing mob"? The barbarians are at the gates!
2) I thought an "entourage" needed someone to accompany.
3) You couldn't find a freeper link for this?
\_ 1) Huh?
2) True!
3) It's ok to attack people I don't agree with!
\_ A quick google will turn up pleanty of webpages about what
has been going on at SFSU. If you don't like frontpage, you
can read the same story a dozen other places.
\_ I've got nothing in the news. Can you point me to a reputable
source for these stories? I'm not trusting FPM on this any
more than I'd trust Mother Jones on a labor conspiracy.
\_ This stuff has been going on at SFSU for years. If you
don't know about it by now... sheesh.
\_ Does "sheesh" = "you must not go to SFSU"?
\_ That's true, it doesn't seem to have appeared in the
news. I have to idea what you would consider
news. I have no idea what you would consider
reputable, and I'm pretty sure you can google as well
as I can. I found a couple of eye-witness accounts,
and an editorial on why the SFSU president did the
right thing in about a minute.
\_ Let's see: Jihad Watch, the Great Separation, and
Front Page Mag are the only ones I get via Google.
Share the ones you've found? The editorial sounds
interesting.
\_ Hmm.. I made a mistake. Most of these links
refer to an earlier incident. Here's the stuff
about the earlier incident, I'll look some more
for this more recent one.
Cron: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2002/05/15/BA110132.DTL
Present professor: http://www.indybay.org/news/2002/05/128582_comment.php
Editorial :http://www.jewishsf.com/bk020524/comm2.shtml
\_ Thank you. The Chron link was plenty, and,
all jokes about its epitaph "the Comical" aside,
this is an actualy news story. That said, wtf?
this is an actual news story. That said, wtf?
C'mon, SFSU kids, less aggro, more solutions.
\_ I had a class at Cal about the history of the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Very fair,
interesting Israeli professor, students were
ca. 30% MSU, 30% IAC and 30% "other". I can
definitely see these turds at SFSU as being
for real after that experience. -John
\_ And 10%??? (MSU == MSA?)
\_ Liberal arts, we're not real good at
complex math. It used to be called MSU
as I recall. They and IAC were the ones
always screaming at each other at
Sather gate. -John
\_ You're a liberal arts major?WTF?
\_ Bite me. -!John |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:34745 Activity:low |
11/8 Looking for a bin->iso converter on the unix AND pc, what are your
recommendations? I tried WinISO but it keeps outputting a bad
file. UltraaISO works but it costs money.
\_ What's a "bin" file?
\_ A type of CD image. Try mounting it with Daemontools and
playing with it under Alcohol120% STFW for 'bin iso file'
yields a bungload of tools, some of them free. -John |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Uncategorized] UID:34746 Activity:nil |
11/8 so /var/mail is starting to fill up again - can we do something
about this?
\_ 100MB quota's!!!
\_ there is lots you can do. You can start with rm $MAIL... or
donate new disk. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:34747 Activity:nil |
11/8 Got XP Pro. Tried to run "Repair". When it started running, it
said something like "37 minutes remaining". Hours later, it was
down to 32 minutes remaining. It's been stuck on "Installing
Devices - 32 minutes remaining" for about 12 hours. What should
I do? Why isn't this working?
\_ Sounds like a bad device driver that XP is trying to salvage
on the repair. The system might be so badly damaged that
it's better to just do a reinstall. What you want to do
is do an upgrade on top of your existing system, not a clean
install. That will take care of all the system files and
it will save your current settings. -williamc
\_ The only repair on XP is reinstall. Get a new hard drive,
reinstall, then try to recover your data. To be fair, Linux is the
same.
\_ You don't really need to do this if you're careful. Hosing
WindowsXP doesn't mean you hosed your hard drive partition.
\_ Why are you trying to run repair on it? http://Sysinternals.com has a lot
of cool toys/fixes for this sort of crap. -John |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/Editors/Emacs] UID:34748 Activity:nil |
11/8 In emacs21 under Windoze, when I press and hold, say, Ctrl-V and emacs
can't keep up with the scrolling, it skips redrawing the screen until I
release the key. Is there a way to disable this behavior so that it'll
keep redrawing the screen the way emacs20 does? Thanks. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Uncategorized] UID:34749 Activity:low |
11/7 Whoa. Aaron on craiglist:
http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/nyc/47785163.html
\_ Who was this?
http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/por/47755650.html
\_ Related:
http://lyrics.rare-lyrics.com/P/Pete-Seeger/Draft-Dodger-Rag.html |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/Domains] UID:34750 Activity:high |
11/7 For whatever reason, I got interested in registering http://weresorry.com only to discover that http://buydomains.com already owns it and won't sell it for less than $688 and possibly more than $10k. What the hell? How long has this been sort of business been legit, and does a company like this actually make any real money? weresorry.info is still available for a mere $16 at http://godaddy.com \_ every time I search for a domain name that ends up available, the next day it is taken and then owned by http://buydomains.com so don't search their website for available domains until you are sure you want to buy it. \_ Time for a class action lawsuit of some sort. This practice should be illegal. \_ Or you could just write a script to search for all sorts of crazy <DEAD>495252349assmonkey1231244.com<DEAD> domains \_ Then might as well just get a static IP without a domain name. \_ I think the idea was, assuming http://buydomains.com has some sort of automated BUY script, you could trick it into buying all sorts of stupid domains. \_ Ahh, I see. Good revenge. \_ I just searched for <DEAD>humaninnards.com<DEAD> on buydomains, and it's available. We'll see in a few days if it's still available. \_ http://weresorry.com was registered 8/29/04. When were you searching for that domain name? \_ Today, and I didn't use http://buydomains.com until after I'd discovered they'd bought it. \_ I just searched for buydomainsnow2004|5.com and it's available. Let's see if it's available tomorrow. You guys, feel free to add to this list. As of Monday, they don't yet exist: <DEAD>buydomainsnow2004.com<DEAD> <DEAD>georgebushdomain.com<DEAD> <DEAD>freerepublicworld.com<DEAD> <DEAD>republicanheaven.com<DEAD> <DEAD>republicandoll.com<DEAD> <DEAD>republicanbelle.com<DEAD> \_ I wonder whether they only register domains after a number of searches are done on them? -John \_ The problem with your experiment is that some nut on the motd might just decide to pay for all those domains now just to fuck with you. \_ No match for "BUSH2024.COM". All the ones up to 2024 are taken though. \_ <DEAD>jennabushfanclub.com<DEAD> still available, let's see tomorrow |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Transportation/Car, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:34751 Activity:nil |
11/7 Rubber tends to crack with age (you know, esp the ones that
seal gaps in cars, or in electronics, pdas, watches, etc).
What materials are best to protect rubber? Veggie oil?
WD-40? Vasoline?
\_ Silicone spray, go to Home Depot/Ace Hardware/Pep Boys
and ask for it. Spray once a year. Do NOT use WD-40, it will
destroy the rubber.
\_ food grade silicone. veggie oil, wd-40, and vasoline
will all break down rubber.
\_ how about Armorall? I've been using that... |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:34752 Activity:moderate |
11/7 Anyway I can print a PDF that has been locked with Printing set
to "Not Allowed"? thanks.
ghostscript is one way.
\_ I assume: ^I can^can I
Unlock it. If you can't, it's trivial to break PDF security.
ghostscript is one way.
\_ Elcomsoft has some toys, albeit commercial. I'm sure you'll find
a way. -John
\_ Didn't they give it away after the whole Dmitry Skylarov thing?
Or did other people "liberate" it for them?
\_ I don't know. I don't think you can get commercial
software, such as Windows XP, without buying it. -John
\_ Call whatever moron locked it and tell them to send you the doc
again without the stupid lock.
\_ pdf2ps --> ps2pdf (for giving the PDF to a Windows user) |
| 2004/11/8 [Reference/Religion] UID:34753 Activity:high |
11/7 The Founding Fathers and Deism
http://www.wallbuilders.com/resources/search/detail.php?ResourceID=29
Of course Paine rejected Christianity in the later stages of
his life.
\_ Interesting, thanks.
\_ The author of the article gets the definition of "deist" completely
wrong. A deist is one who believes there is a (Christian) God, who
created the world, but left it alone after that. Most deists
believe in rational explanations for the miracles described in
the Bible.
The author would do much better just to use the term "agnostics",
"atheists", or separation of church-and-staters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=deist&x=0&y=0
http://www.bartleby.com/61/44/D0104400.html
\_ Amusingly, you got the definition of 'deist' wrong also.
-- ilyas
\_ And the right definition is?
\_ I think the salient feature of Deism is the claim that
the existence of God can be rationally deduced. Such a
God may or may not be Christian and may or may not
have left the world alone after Creation. I notice
some web definitions support your 'left it alone'
thing, but to me that's a pretty arbitrary distinction
to make for an 'ism.' -- ilyas
\_ Uh, I think all three links support what I wrote, and
I do think what I wrote is more accurate than what
you added.
Most deists also speak from a Christian heritage.
I wouldn't say what I wrote was the "wrong" definition,
but rather that it CAN be independent of Christianity.
The point was that the author of the article got
it nearly completely wrong, whereas I essentially
got it right.
\_ Maybe you should ask deists, rather than dictionaries
what they think deism means (for instance http://deism.com).
The author of the article may have meant
'non-atheists.' -- ilyas
\_ Frankly, I value Wikipedia, Merriam-Webster, and
the American Heritage Dictionary more in this
case.
\_ Seriously though, if you don't think http://deism.com
is a credible source, ask someone on campus
who studies deism. Dictionaries are often
a lame source for technical definitions.
-- ilyas
\_ You also need to get off your FUCKING HIGH
HORSE, ilyas. What the fuck is "Amusingly,
you got [it wrong] also" and then waiting
for me to ask you what the right one is?
You know you come off as a dick?
\_ Ok, dictionary boy. Btw, did you know
your beloved wikipedia claims Cheney is
a neocon? Heh. Honestly, dictionaries
are great for capturing common use, but
they get technical terms wrong ALL THE
TIME, which isn't surprising if you
consider how dictionaries get written.
-- ilyas
My favorite recent example was a
dictionary defining a 'byte' to be a
'collection of bits.' -- ilyas
\_ Tell us about simpson's paradox ilyas
\_ Yup, I was wrong about it applying
in that case. Do you feel better
now? -- ilyas
\_ But Cheney's a member of The Project
for the New American Century. So,
how is he *not* a neo-con?
\_ Hmm, ilyas didn't respond, I guess
this means he was wrong.
\_ My problem with the term
'neocon' is that the test for
membership in this elite group
seems to be everchanging. I
was called a neocon on the motd
once. You seem to think
membership in PNAC is the same
as being a neocon. Someone
else might think it's some sort
of ex liberal jew hawk. Maybe
you should all get together and
decide what, if anything, this
word means. As for my wrongness,
you hereby have an official
pass, signed by me, which
says you are right, and I am
wrong in this, all previous,
and all subsequent arguments
we ever have. Maybe then you
can find another fish to trawl.
If both me, and Cheney are
neocons, then the term is
meaningless. -- ilyas
\_ Are you Chinese? Do you
understand the effect the
opium trade had on China?
\_ How can you have a "Christian" God who leaves the world
alone after creation? That doesn't jibe with, well, Christ.
\_ Right. Jefferson, a deist, did not believe in the divinity
of Jesus Christ. It's not really a "Christian" God, in this
sense, as you've noted.
\_ But he owned slaves! Are you Chinese? Do you understand
the effect the opium trade had on China? |
| 2004/11/8 [Transportation/Misc] UID:34754 Activity:kinda low |
11/7 I just got a Segway!!! How do I join the Segway Polo club?
\_ Have fun falling.
\_ why the heck is it 80 pounds? Is it the battery?
\_ Any lighter wouldn't be enough to make others scream when you run
over their feet. |
| 2004/11/8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34755 Activity:moderate |
11/8 So Powell wants to go, Condi wants the position of Defense secretary,
and Rumsfeld still ain't finished yet. What is Dubya, Moron-in-Chief,
going to do? The only decisions he makes -- as ultimate delegator --
are appointments. (He actually doesn't make any decisions himself, he
follows the advice of the person in charge, and blames them if
something goes wrong. The only mistakes he's made are in who he has
appointed, according to him.)
\_ that's what a good president does, you want a dictator?
\_ See, just add in the great speechwriters, and any good American
can be President!
- Iraq WMDs: Blame and fire CIA Director "Slam Dunk" Tenet
- Iraq post-war: Blame "catastrophic success"!
- Abu Ghraib: Blame Rumsfeld!
\_ Wait! I thought he was this manipulative evil genius? I'm so
confused! What are the ABB talking points today?! -confused lefty
\_ Dummy!! Karl Rove is the evil genius. Dubya is the slack-jawed
idiot. Get your evil org-chart straight!
\_ If Cheney were to die, Bush might become President.
\_ that's what a good president does, like Reagan.
\_ See, just add in ...
\_ "The buck stops here." -H. Truman.
\_ Dubya will have to ask Cheney for permission about any cabinet
changes. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34756 Activity:very high |
11/7 So does anyone really believe anymore that Bush lied about WMD? The
Duelfer report proved 2 things:
1) Iraq didn't have WMD's
2) Had we infiltrated Saddam's top level of generals, we still would
have though he had WMD's.
\_ He sure as hell didn't tell the truth. Look up the word "lie"
in the dictionary and I think it is obvious that he lied according
to definition number 2. It is what is called in linguistics as a
"contested case" though, so I don't really expect you to admit
v "contested case" though, so I don't really expect you to admit
that the word has multiple definitions.
\_ Everyone knows what "lie" means. We don't need you to help us
parse what the definition of "is" is. Thanks.
\_ Au contraire. I have posted the definition of it and
had people insist that it was wrong or inapplicable
in this case. The op is trying to do this right now.
Do you admit that Bush lied?
2. A fiction; a fable; an untruth. --Dryden.
\_ In other words you're upset that Bush was 'wrong'. All
the claims about lying did not use this definition but the
one where the lie is to intentionally deceive. Are you now
saying Bush didn't intentionally deceive anyone?
\_ No, all the claims did not say that Bush intentionally
decieved. You just decided to read it that way.
I have no idea if Bush deliberatly decieved. I know
that he spoke with reckless disregard for the truth,
in that he claimed certaintly when he had no business
doing so, but I doubt that he knew he was uttering
a falsehood when he did so.
\_ Um, his claims about WMD's would have been verified
by Saddam's own generals. They were confirmed by
every intelligence organization in the world. If you
define this as lying, you're a fucking moron.
\_ Except for all those intelligence organizations
that said they didn't have them, oh and the
WEAPONS INSPECTORS. You know, the guys who
were responsible for KNOWING THIS STUFF. But
hey history is hard, lets make up facts later.
The fact is Bush and his administration gave
solid data about where and how many WMDs were
in Iraq and it was ALL WRONG. But rather than
let weapons inspectors do their jobs they
insisted we go to war right now, and look
where that got us.
\_ If you read "Plan of Attack", you'd find that
Dubya's people were telling him that Blix was
pooching the WMD hunt. Dubya's people were
convinced Saddam had WMDs -- and Dubya wasn't
going to take the chance of Blix reporting
Saddam didn't have anything, especially when
Tenet said he had them for sure.
\_ No they were not confirmed by every intelligence
agency in the world. Either you are badly
misinformed or simply lying, it is hard to say
which. Every intelligence agency in the world,
including the CIA, said that they did not have
enough information to tell one way or another.
And I see no evidence that Saddam's own generals
believed that he had WMD. Is this another one
of your fantasies? Here is the relavent quote
from your own source: "ISG found no credible
evidence that any field elements knew about
plans for CW use during Operation Iraqi Freedom."
It is amazing to me that in your twisted
view of reality Bush telling an untruth
is actully him telling the truth. You are truly
a brainwashed sheeple. War is Peace?
\_ "The whold world thought we'd find stockpiles"
- GW Bush
Dubya could be lying right here, but I don't
remember Kerry ever having challenged him on
this sentence.
this sentence. -Depressed Liberal
\_ Yeah, hence his downfall. But then again,
the only politician I remember being
outspoken in oppositiion to this was
Barbara Lee and look what happened to her.
\_ Yeah, and you wonder why Edwards didn't
take "no doubt" Cheney quotes and roast
him on those during the VP debate.
\_ She got re-elected?
\_ Bush was responsible for knowing more about the Iraqi military
capabilities than the Iraqi generals before invading. No more blood
for big oil! And no more posting quots from Clinton, Gore,
Albright, various UN officials, or any other foreign leaders who
said the same things Bush said about Iraqi WMD. Bush lied! Men
died! No more war for oil! Down with the moronic bible thumping
pig fucking red neck Republicans! AAAAAAUUUUUUUUGGGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!
\_ Another trash talking anonymous Republican troll.
You are pathetic. -ausman
You are pathetic. You can't even shut up for a minute,
as even President Bush has asked us to do, to try and
help bring the country back together. -ausman
\_ Wow an anonymous taunting Republican coward on the motd.
What a novelty. Both Bush and Kerry have asked people to
try and bring this country together, but you just can't
help yourself, can you? -ausman
\_ A salute Bush for not caring what his critics in the
reality based community say. - danh
\_ Please. The man wanted to invade Iraq so much that he pressured
the CIA to provide intel to support his plans. All contradicting
evidence was ignored. He lied.
\_ But the bi-partisan reports said that the "pressure" did not
alter any of the CIA's opinions.
Summary: The CIA thought Saddam had WMDs -- they even thought
the aluminum tubes were dual-use at least (though clearly wrong
in hindsight). The State and Energy departments were the ones
who didn't think the aluminum tubes were nuke related. But,
for Dubya at least, CIA trumps State Department where
intelligence is concerned.
\_ With Rumsfeld breathing heavily in his ear, Dubya was bound to
discount anything Powell had to say; why do you think the
invasion was executed with blatant disregard for the Powell
doctrine? The Pres. wanted what he got, and he got what he
wanted. It's hardly a leap of logic to see that Henry II was
responsible for the death of Sir Thomas a Beckett even though
Henry never actually told anyone to kill him.
\- What if he actually said "Who will rid me of this
troublesome yeast?" ? --psb
\_ Then they killed the wrong prelates; Chimay is on the
other side of the Channel.
\_ If the topic is: "Post-war Iraq, why didn't Dubya follow
the Powell doctrine of overwhelming force?", well, Rumsfeld
was right about Afghanistan even when all the generals were
telling him he was wrong. The same generals were saying
the "same" thing about Iraq. You're Dubya. Who do you
believe? (Yeah, it's a specious argument, but this at
least provides "plausible deniability" -- which is PLENTY
for the True Believers.)
\_ The True Believers don't even need that. They still
believe that Saddam had WMD, and they still believe that
Saddamn was directly responsible for 9/11. See, they
believe these things because the President said as
much, and they will continue to believe him until he
tells them otherwise. You don't need a conspiracy
theory to understand the immense charisma and its
deletorious effects on the ability of his followers to
to see the truth.
\_ Rumsfeld was not right about Afghanistan. The US
lucked out pretty heavily on that one, for one, by
having Germans and Poles ready to pick up some of the
slack while we went on an (unsuccessful) Osama-hunt
through the south. The country has barely managed to
hold together, the central government has little
authority beyond Kabul, opium production is up due to
lack of central control, and people seem to be putting
up with the status quo simply because there's at least
a smidgeon of hope that things will get better. You
simply can't have an invasion with the minimum amount
of force required to win the military victory without
planning for the aftermath, which, in Afghanistan, can
best be described as "amateurish". -John
\_ I think it doesn't do much to condemn Dubya as knowingly (1) having
lied or (2) misled the American people -- without smoking gun
evidence (tapes) of deceit from him. I do think Dubya should be
held accountable for losing world respect from there not being
weapons, Abu Ghraib, and the post-war quagmire.
"The Buck Stops Here".
Of course, everyone who voted for Dubya in 2004 would rather have
Dubya as President than Kerry -- and that's 59 million and counting
-- but that's how democracy works. -liberal
\_ So who was responsible for Omaha beach? And where did that buck
stop?
\_ I am stupid. I compare everything to WW2. Kill me now.
\_ As if infiltrating Saddam's generals is as easy as flipping a
light switch, or putting on a hat. Saddam fed living people into
*plastic* *shredder* *machines*. Sometimes head first, sometimes
feet first. Most who slam Bush for removing Saddam don't mind
abortion either, so I guess torture and mass murder are O.K.
\_ The American people wouldn't have supported Saddam sending
our boys to take out Saddam if he had no WMDs.
Anyways, we're there now, and Dubya supporters want to look
forward, not back.
\_ And the US has already killled 100,000+ civilians. Do you
think the grieving widows care if their husband died in
a shredder or in an air raid?
\_ If it means a safer America, 59+ million Americans think it's
worth it! Anyway, it's probably only 10-40,000 civilians.
Ask Iraqis - they still think it's worth it!
\_ No, probably 100,000+
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7967-2004Oct28.html
And do the Iraqis still think it was worth it?
I know the latest poll has 97% of them wanting
us to leave. And most Americans no longer
believe the fable that the Iraq war has made
us safer.
\_ "These numbers seem to be inflated" - Human Rights Watch
in the URL you posted.
Yeah, Iraqis want us to leave, but the question was
whether the war was worth it.
You're right about most Americans thinking it didn't
make us safer, but most Americans also think going into
Iraq was the right thing to do. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Industry/Jobs, Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:34757 Activity:nil |
11/8 MS Search job available in Redmond: http://csua.org/u/9vd mfw@microsoft.com if you're interested --dbushong |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34758 Activity:very high |
11/7 Isn't it funny that all the multi-billion dollar eye-in-the-sky
surveillance program that you and I paid for... the SR-71, the
U2, and the spy satellites... can't tell you with certainty
that Sadam has WMD or not? So much for our smart, all electronic
"intelligence"
\_ we have the tech to see someone give us the finger from 60k ft
\_ you can go underground. You still need human intelligence.
\_ You obviously never served.
\_ and you have?
\_ Are you Chinese?
\_ Are you Yiddish?
\_ You can directly blame Jimmy Carter for starting this all-tech,
no-people nonsense. Yet another legacy of his utter failure.
And yes, he was also the first President to say nukular, so you
grammarians can add that to your list, as well as the need to
invent terms like "double-digit inflation" and "stagflation" and
showing Islamic psychos that the US can be cowed with terrorism.
\_ First "nukular" president was Eisenhower.
\_ Not to mention being responsible for the oil shock, the Yom
Kippur war, Leonid Brezhnev and the Iran hostage crisis. He
is also directly accountable for the unraveling of the Bretton
Woods dollar/gold exchange system, the Vietnamese invasion of
Cambodia, and the Polish military crackdown on Solidarnosc. In
fact, the evil bastard wimp is probably the reason why the
middle east will be destabilized for generations to come. And
did you know that he also started the China opium trade? -John
did you know that he also started the Yiddish holocaust? -John
\_ You're right, John. Carter was a great President.
\_ No, I'm just trying to provide a counterpoint to my stated
conviction that he was THE ANTICHRIST who is single-
handedly responsible for all the world's ills. -John
\_ You forgot disco and the death of Jon Bonham.
\_ JOHN B ONHAM IS NT DEAD YUO FUKCING COMMUNIST.
\_ And John Lennon.
\_ Yeah, but I hear he swings an awful lot of pipe.
\_ Must be all those peanuts. |
| 2004/11/8 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34759 Activity:high |
11/7 OSC surprises me again with an original take on a current event:
Osama bin Laden's recent video probably had little effect on our
presidential election. But that wasn't his goal.
Remember, Osama doesn't actually care who wins our election. He's
worried about his own campaign to be Caliph of all Islam -- sort
of the Pope and Augustus Caesar rolled into one.
And in his campaign, that videotape was a no-lose proposition.
If Kerry won, then he could tell his followers that Americans had
chosen Kerry because they feared the mighty hand of Islam and
they only need to continue on the present course to achieve
complete victory.
And if Bush won, he could tell the Muslim world that the American
people had chosen to keep with their satanic leader, so now the
American people deserve to be murdered.
\_ what's OSC and why is this original
\_ Orson Scott Card?
\_ Link, man! Give us a link! |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/OS/Solaris] UID:34760 Activity:low |
10/8 On solaris, what do the two flags [+-] between the username and the
#blocks used represent. Sample...
Block limits
User used soft hard timeleft
foo -- 2104304 5000000 10000000
bar +- 21538656 20000000 220000000 2.4 days
^^
\_ Could they mean you are over one quota but not the other???
Doesn't the man page answer this?
\_ The plus I believe does mean over soft quota. I am guessing
the second plus would mean time has expired. Not in manpage. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/HW] UID:34761 Activity:high |
11/8 is this supposed to work: open a WinXP remote desktop connection from A
to B, and from B remotely open one back to A?
\_ Probably not. Why would you do this?
\_ You want it to recursively draw the screen?
\_ You can go A -> B- > C -> A. Not sure why....
\_ How does the screen look like??? Does it recurse infinitely?
\_ It *very* quickly turns into a blur. There's only so many
pixels. Since the system has to reduce pixel count on each
iteration/display you very quickly get to the point where
it only uses a pixel to represent an entire screen. I guess
you could go into full screen mode, get rid of the task bar
and other stuff that takes up a static amount of space but
I've never bothered. Go get 3 machines and let us know.
\_ When you are sitting in front of A and have connected
A->B->C, and you try to connect A->B->C->A, shouldn't it
lock the whole screen as soon as you've entered the
password for A since A is now being accessed remotely from
C?
\_ But... but C is remotely controlled from A?? The
universe will explode! Actually I think I'll try this
experiment with my cubicle neighbors.
\_ Dunno about remote desktop but VNC certainly will let you link a
client to a machine listening to the client. I did it once. was a
somewhat amusing ride. -ERicM
\_ FYI: the reason I asked is because from home i wanted to make sure I
could remotely connect from work through my firewall etc. So I went
through the VPN and remote'd to work, from there remote'd to home,
and it would get to the login screen and then my VPN died, every
time. Something wasn't happy.
\_ The remote desktop server in WinXP is a trimmed down of full-blown
terminal services. The main difference is that the WinXP RDS only
supports one connection at a time. If you connect to a computer,
it locks the console and takes control of the desktop session. If
the system was already under the control of a remote desktop
session, the new session will take over the old one. Therefore it
is impossible to create an infinite loop of desktops within WinXP.
I'm pretty sure that the same goes for full terminal services
(except that you can't kick off the console user, instead it creates
a new desktop under terminal services control). |
| 2004/11/8 [Uncategorized] UID:34762 Activity:nil |
11/8 Was there a noticeably affect or a noticeable effect on the speed?
\_ Huh? If this is a grammar question, "affect" usually is used as
a verb, and "effect" usually is used as a noun. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:34763 Activity:low |
11/7 http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/11/08/watson.policy/index.html Alright since when did CNN switch to the right side? Frigging traitor, I'm going back to the good 'ol CBS liberal news. \_ The behind-the-scene look at the campaign by the Newsweek embeds is a pretty good read. Not terribly flattering to the Kerry camp. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6407226/site/newsweek \_ Nice of them to fail to report any of this until after the election. \_ I assume holding off reporting till after the election is part of the deal that got the campaigns to allow the embeds access in the first place. \_ If the press has real news that would make a difference to the way people vote we should know about it. If the reporters in the Bush campaign saw the same things, they'd be leaked all over the place. I want everything from both campaigns equally. I want the truth. If you can't get the truth from the media in a timely manner that would make a differnce what the hell good are they? |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Uncategorized] UID:34764 Activity:nil |
10/8 Any recommendations for software similar to gallery but:
a) distinct namespace for each user's albumns
b) more intuitive and attractive UI/ navigation |
| 2004/11/8 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34765 Activity:nil |
11/8 http://csua.org/u/9vg (New York Times) American-led large-scale assault on Falluja has begun "They'll win if it's bloody; we'll win if we minimize civilian casualties." -Marine A Falluja resident who tried entering the city on Monday said he had found no way through the seal. The resident said the situation was much different from the situation in April, when Americans battled the Falluja insurgents before withdrawing and when there were many gaps that gun runners could exploit to keep the insurgents supplied. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Uncategorized] UID:34766 Activity:moderate |
11/8 Does anyone know of a reliable plastics shop/dealer in the LA area?
\_ other than TAP, since TAP is only in the Bay Area.
\_ I'd try TAP.
\_ I bet BUD DAY knows where to find a reliable plastics dealer in the
LA area.
\_ <insert obligatory 'The Graduate' joke>
\_ I'd TAP yer mom in a heartbeat!
\_ nice. |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD] UID:34767 Activity:nil |
11/8 FreeBSD 5.3 is out:
http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.3R/announce.html |
| 2004/11/8-9 [Computer/SW/Database] UID:34768 Activity:nil |
11/8 Hello, new 500 list: http://www.top500.org/lists/plists.php?Y=2004&M=11 |
| 4/14 |