Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:November:10 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2004/11/10-11 [Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD] UID:34799 Activity:nil
11/10   I'm evaluating a bunch of FreeBSD 4.x-based firewalls booting from CF
        cards on a pcengines.ch WRAP board (basically a better Soekris with
        Natl. Geode CPU).  One works fine, but the other will not load the
        kernel properly on any but a small number of CF models.  The CF cards
        are fine, regular FreeBSD can disklabel & mount them, but the vendor
        of the other software (GTA GBWare) says there are "timing issues" with
        all but very few cards.  Just out of pure curiosity, has anyone
        encountered this sort of thing before?  -John
2004/11/10 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:34800 Activity:kinda low
11/10   No Blood for Cocoa
        French open fire on protesters
        http://www.washingtontimes.com/world/20041110-124641-6061r.htm
        \_ Let's see if International ANSWER organizes mass protests against
           this racist war.
           \_ ANSWER is one of the unfortunate side-effects of being committed
              to listening to everybody. This comment was likely posted by an
              motd conservative but I agree with the slant...and the answer is
              No, they haven't. They are apparently too busy protesting the US
              (I'm sorry, COALITION) action in Fallujah. --ulysses
              \_ I'm having trouble parsing that first sentence.  You're
                 saying that ANSWER has a policy of listening to everyone?
                 \_ No, I'm saying I have that policy and most of my like-
                    minded friends who participated in the protests do as well.
                    I was on their mailing list for awhile just to hear what
                    they had to say. That meant tolerating ANSWER and the
                    Spartacus League and their ilk. I am aware that NION and
                    ANSWER had a lot to do with organizing some of the protests.
2004/11/10 [Computer/HW/Memory] UID:34801 Activity:nil
11/10   A memory stick for japanO`philes
        http://www.japantoday.com/e/?content=product&id=795
2004/11/10-11 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:34802 Activity:low 54%like:35422
11/10   Which is better: Firefox 1.0 or the browser part in NS 7.2?  Thanks.
        \_ Just to dredge up old shit, how did Netscape Corp. ever make money?
           I remember that you could buy their browser in a box for $50, but
           you could also download it for free.  So where's the business model?
           \_ portal?
              \_ But that didn't happen until after they lost the browser war
                 and got bought out by AOL.
           \_ As I recall, the brower was origianally written as a PR
              thing for their networking business.  When they lost the
              browser war, they just went back to what they were doing
              before.
           \_ They made it selling their server software, duh.
        \_ No comparison. FF >> NS.
        \_ Having used FF and Mozilla a bit I don't see any major advantages
           to FF.  However, I'd say Mozilla > FF >> Netscape
           \_ do you use tabbed browsing a lot?  I do. -FireFox h0z3r
              \_ Yes.  Moz does tabbed browsing just fine, and even has a
                 new tab' button on the tab bar opposite the 'close tab' button
           \_ Supposedly FF takes fewer CPU cycles and less memory than Mozilla
              and NS, both of which are loaded with bloatware.  Is that not
              what you see?
              \_ I definitely appreciate that Mozilla and FF don't have the
                 annoying 'branding' that NS does, but I don't see any
                 signifigant CPU or RAM savings with FF over Mozilla.
                 Mozilla has the advantage of greater stability then FF.
2004/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34803 Activity:moderate
11/10   This is kinda funny: Protest Warrior vs Gael Murphy
        http://hq.protestwarrior.com/?page=/featured/Miami/military_shield.php
        \_ Wow, imagine what good the fine folks of Protest Warrior could
           accomplish if they'd just grow up.
2004/11/10 [Transportation/Car] UID:34804 Activity:nil
11/10   MS previews new search engine:
        http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041110/D8690G3G0.html
2004/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34805 Activity:very high
11/10   Bush to appoint Alberto Gonzalez as AG:
        http://csua.org/u/9w8 (Yahoo News)
        \_ I wasn't expecting the Spanish Inquisition.
           \_obNOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!
        \_ Heh!
           "Gonzales publicly defended the administration's policy -
           essentially repudiated by the Supreme Court and now being fought
           out in the lower courts - of detaining certain terrorism suspects
           for extended periods without access to lawyers or courts.
           He also wrote a controversial February 2002 memo in which Bush
           claimed the right to waive anti-torture law and international
           treaties providing protections to prisoners of war."
           [This article is also wrong.  It's not "certain terror suspects";
           Dubya claimed the right to detain any person, citizen or not,
           indefinitely, he deemed a threat to national security.]
           \_ I think he's a lot less evil than Ashcroft.  Obviously
              I dissagree with the Administrtions detainee policy, but
              I spent some time researching Gonzales yesterday when his
              name was being mentioned as a possible AG, and he really
              seems much more balanced than Ashcroft.  He seems to make
              single issue pressure groups on both the left and the right
              nervous, which is a good thing for a supreme court judge to
              do (and let's face it that's where this is heading.)  In contrast,
              I think  Ashcroft was both incopetent and an actually evil man.
              \_ Can you give me a good URL which describes just how bad
                 Ashcroft is?  It seems to me that the Patriot Act, although
                 giving the government just too many powers, has not been
                 seriously abused, yet, and that Ashcroft has just been
                 the convenient pincushion for all the Bush-haters.  Mainly,
                 I want actions which show his incompetence and evilness,
                 not attitudes. -liberal
                 \_ Suspension of Habeas Corpus.  That should be sufficient.
                    \_ Not to disagree, but do you also think Gonzalez (and
                       even Dubya) are MORE responsible than Ashcroft for
                       habeas corpus suspensions?
                 \_ There was a great segment on CSPAN to this effect a
                    week or so ago.
        \_ Powell:   "Who's the new AG, Don?"
           Rumsfeld: "AG."
           Powell:   "Yeah, AG."
           Rumsfeld: "Yeah."
           Powell:   "......"
           Powell:   "So, who is he?"
           Rumsfeld: "Who's who?"
           Powell:   "The new AG."
           Rumsfeld: "Like I said, AG."
           Powell:   "Yeah, AG.  Who's he?"
           Rumsfeld: "The new AG."
           Powell:   "Yeah, the new AG.  How many times do I have to ask?"
           Rumsfeld: "I just told you.  AG, Powell."
           Powell:   "Don't call me pal.  I'm no pal. Just answer my question."
           Rumsfeld: "Alright.  It's AG, Colin".
           Powell:   "How dare you call me asshole?  You're fired."
           \_ Our Secretary of State is Colon Powell:
              http://bbs.chinadaily.com.cn/forumpost1.shtml?pid=186905
2004/11/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34806 Activity:kinda low
11/11   Why do unbleached coffee filters cost MORE than the bleached ones?
        Is the price of bleach negative?
        \_ Just a guess: economy of scale + higher quailty materials
        \_ Just like brown rice costing more than white rice: no idea why.
           \_ Well, if rice bran is worth more than the endosperm, that could
              do it.  Also, brown rice spoils more easily than white, so you're
              also paying for the brown rice that spoiled before it got sold.
              \_ I see.  Why does brown rice spoil more easily?
                 \_ The bran contains fat and protein, which go rancid.  Fat
                    and protein make it a good component of animal feed.
        \_ Maybe the cost is lower, but only the price is higher because of
           higher demand?
           \_ It could also be a case of lower supply. Maybe only one
              factory makes the unbleached ones while twelve factories
              make the bleached ones.
        \_ feelgood markup
        \_ I wonder if unbleached paper products are made by dyeing bleached
           paper brown.  Else how come the brown color is so consistent.
           \_ Must be a conspiracy.  Oooooh aaaaaah.
2004/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:34807 Activity:very high
11/11   The Trouble with Roe
        http://www.nationalreview.com/mccarthy/mccarthy200411100848.asp
        Excellent.
        \_ I don't like democracy. -- ilyas
           \_ Huh?
              \_ "The people are revolting!" -geordan
        \_ "The Constitution says not a word about abortion".  Nor about
           women voting.  Without going into strict vs. loose constructionism
           you cannot have a static document that constrains every single
           aspect of how your government evolves.  New shit happens, and
           a democracy must adapt to deal with it.  This is why we have a
           supreme court, to interpret the damn constitution, instead of a
           500 page EU monstrosity that addresses every conceivable
           eventuality of government.  -John
           \_ Adding to what you said:  Dubya is a strict constructionist.
           \_ No, that's why we have a legistature and an amendment
              process.
              \_ ...which is currently busy banning commie fags from
                 getting married.  Next?
                 \_ When in doubt you can always gay-bait, huh?
                    \_ Referring to pp.  Sarcasm, pal.
           \_ the power belongs to the people.  Why not let them decide
              through their legislatures rather than judicial fiat?
              \_ You see we have a government of 3 branches and it is a
                 good idea to have 1 branch not be accountable to the
                 people. This is a republic, not a democracy.
                 \_ You misunderstand the nature of the 'republican'
                    contract, as embodied in the Constitution.
                    What insights on the morality of abortion does
                    a Supreme Court Justice possess as compared to
                    say, a MOTD contributor?
                    \_ A bunch more, by virtue of a superior education,
                       judicial experience reviewing and interpreting
                       legislation passed by representatives elected by said
                       MOTD contributor, and authority stemming from
                       confirmation by those elected officials.  Point? -John
                       \_ Though I don't know you, you appear to me
                          as a statist who likes
                          authority figures to tell you how to think.
                          You prefer the warm sanctuary of security rather
                          than the risks and responsibilities of liberty.
        \_ A majority of the public supports choice.
           \_ Caveat: so do I.  However, a majority of the public may also
              support killing you and scattering your ashes; the joy of the
              Constitution and the Amendment process is that a simple majority
              cannot vote your rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of
              happiness out of existence.  Should Congress attempt to pass the
              "Very Specific Extermination Law," the USSC would be able to stop
              the law from being executed against your person.  Yay, the
              system!
              \_ You're assuming that said law doesn't become a constitutional
                 ammendment.
        \_ I'm sure the public was against interracial marriage at the time of
           the case that allowed it.  Majority does not always rule.
           \_ A) You're "Sure?"  Any evidence? B) I actually don't care
              about A, because this is a completely unrelated red-herring.
              \_ I am not sure you can dismiss pp's point quite so easily.
                 Even if the public was not in fact against interracial
                 marriage, it _reasonably could have been_.  And so you are
                 left with having to give an account of that situation anyways.
                 Consider the medieval 'public.'  Democracy sort of works where
                 there is a cultural bedrock of common decency on which it can
                 rest. -- ilyas
                 \_ Democray only works if there is an understanding that
                    while majority has power, the rights of the minority(ies)
                    need to be respected and considered.  This is something
                    that has been in short supply lately.
                 \_ Ok, furthermore, the consitution actually DOES talk
                    about race relations.  Given Amendment 15 (in
                    conjunction with 14) it's hard to argue that the
                    Consitiution doesn't implictly conver interraccial
                    marriage.  The Constitution DOES trump the majority,
                    this is covered in the article.  (Unless the majority
                    is so large it can change the constitution.)  But
                    abortion just isn't covered in the constitution.
                    \_ Erm, if you stretch XIV and XV ("voting stuff") to
                       cover interracial marriage, I can just as well stretch
                       IX and X ("rights stuff") to cover abortion.  I
                       hereby sentence you to look at tubgirl.  -John
                    \_ Fine, pick something 'obviously bad' not covered by the
                       Constitution.  (Say no woman voting, per John's post
                       above).
                       Now imagine a 'fairly plausible' society
                       which would have a majority support for the
                       'obviously bad' thing.  Now it's not so easy to dismiss
                       them philosopher kings, is it? -- ilyas
                       \_ A) Woman voting is also covered in the
                          constitution, and before Amendment 19.  B) I'm
                          sorry we live in a democracy.  Maybe you could
                          move someplace else, one run by philosopher kings.
                          \_ You = st00pid tr00l
                    \_ "abortion just isn't covered in the constitution".
                       Yeah.  Basically, when does life begin?  At conception?
                       If so, the zygote has as much of a right as a newborn.
                       Killing the zygote is killing a newborn.
                       Does life begin at birth?  If so, you can terminate
                       the zygote.
                       Does life begin at the third trimester?  If so,
                       you can terminate up to the second trimester.
                       Yes, the Constitution does not cover when life begins.
                       Pro-lifers say Science says life begins at zygote.
                       Pro-choice ppl say Science says life doesn't REALLY
                       begin until the second/third trimester.
                       Dur, someone shewt me.  Life has obviously ended here.
                       \_ You're slightly mischaracterizing the pro-choice
                          position.  Sperm are alive, eggs are alive, and
                          \_ Every sperm is sacred!  --monty python
                          zygotes are alive.  The things that have rights and
                          deserve protection are human beings, not human being
                          cells.  An embryo is not a person because it is
                          not capable of thought or emotion until it has
                          become sufficiently developed.  Exactly what level
                          of development allows for thought and emotion is a
                          scientific question, and therefore a sound basis for
                          law.  When a soul is created is purely a question for
                          religion, and thus is not a sound basis for law.  In
                          RvW they took amicus briefs from a bunch of religions
                          asking when an embryo becomes a person and got
                          answers varying from "before conception" to
                          "not until it has taken its first breath".
                          \_ So is anyone still wondering why I called
                             this subthread a "red-herring" and tried to
                             kill it early?
                          \_ Yes, this is what I meant when I said "Science
                             says life doesn't REALLY begin until", but I
                             thought that was obvious.
        \_ !excellent
           If he takes that long to get to the point, he probably doesn't have
           much to say.
        \_ Jane Roe is now pro-life
           \_ OJ is still looking for the real killer
              \_ non-sequitor counter argument
                 \_ Are you Chinese?  Do you understand the effect the opium
                    trade had on China?
           \_ ironic
2004/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:34808 Activity:very high 57%like:30533
11/11   I get the feeling the Peterson's trial is going to be like OJ Simpson
        all over again. If you are rich [1], you can get away with anything.
        \_ 3 things unique about the OJ case. 1. Johnny Cockroach and his
           lame glove/chubaka defense. 2. Uneducated minority jury who
           have sympathy for people of their own kind. 3. Uneducated
           jury who believe the glove/chubaka defense.
        \_ What the fuck are you guys talking about?  I saw something
           about this case on http://www.cnn.com but they didn't explain the context
           at all either.  What the fuck is the matter with this country
           that every news story involving, say, the secretary of defense
           of the U.S. tells you who everyone is in case you don't know, but
           for some stupid fucking celebrity trial tabloid bullshit, it's
           assumed everyone knows?
        \_ Peterson is a shit salesman.  You are a knucklehead.  His parents
           took out a loan on their house to pay his lawyers.
           \_ Why? He's fucking guilty.
                \_ why? cuz he uses a trout pole for ocean fishing?
                        go to a pier and see what twinks fish with these
                        days
                   \_ Not because of what he used, but because of what he
                      didn't use.  He told police that he bought some fake bait
                      and used it for fishing, but when the police found the
                      bait it was still in its packaging.
              \_ Because they love their son and will believe anything he tells
                 them as long as it preserves their image of him as a good boy.
        \_ No.  The prosecutors presented a weak case.  Also the police
           did a poor job of detective work.
        \_ With OJ, you had damning DNA evidence.  The jury believed the
           defense showed reasonable doubt with a racist detective who might
           have planted the DNA evidence.
           With Peterson, there is no damning DNA evidence.
           \_ The OJ defence of a racist cop trying to frame him is a lot more
              compelling, if improbable, than the Peterson defence that the
              police did not look hard enough for the 'real killer'.
        \_ [1] Scott Peterson was a fertilizer salesman, I must be in the wrong
           business.
2004/11/10-11 [Industry/Startup, Finance/Investment] UID:34809 Activity:moderate
11/10   Here is a problem for you google employees to solve:  Yahoo Finance
        is a big big part of yahoo's revenues.  It's missing something that
        so far nobody has found a way to solve.  Keeping track of options
        pricing and displaying historical charts on options pricing.  The
        reason is that each stock has hundreds of calls/puts.  Nobody has
        yet figure out a way to store all that data and display it even
        after expiration.   I'd like to see such a feature on google
        finance.  It's a complex data archiving problem.  Anybody want to
        guess the storage required to store the daily option prices for all
        stocks for the latest 10 years?  And have it available for quick
        retrieval?
        \_ do your own job
        \_ I'll guess: a few dozen gigs at most.  Make dupes across a bunch
           of different systems for fast retrieval.  And: YOU'RE FIRED!
           \_ I could see it coming to several hundred megs a day, which would
              be maybe 100GB/year, but that's still chump change.
              \_ several hundred megs a day?  to store a bunch of easily
                 compressed numbers?  c'mon....  I felt I was being rather
                 conservative saying the whole thing would take ~40 gigs.
                 but yes whatever the real total would be in disk space, the
                 total cost is effectively zero for anyone with a real use
                 for the data.
 \_ not only has this problem been solved, it has been solved by just about
    every large financial house. maybe you should come up with another
    theory to explain why it's not on your favorite free consumer portal.
    have you thought about the relative population sizes of option-savvy
    traders vs the population of equity traders? --aaron
        \_ not only has this problem been solved, it has been solved by just
           about every large financial house. maybe you should come up with
           another theory to explain why it's not on your favorite free
           consumer portal. have you thought about the relative population
           sizes of option-savvy traders vs the population of equity
           traders? --aaron
        \_ For next question, we'll ask why GOOG doesn't have a free level 2
           NASDAQ feed...
           \_ they haven't gotten past the level 1 boss yet.
2004/11/10-11 [Computer/SW/Languages/C_Cplusplus] UID:34810 Activity:low
11/10   In ISO C, since the type for difference between two pointers is
        ptrdiff_t, does that imply the correct type for array indices is
        ptrdiff_t?
        \_ The standard says only that the array index is of an integer type.
           \_ I see.  Thanks.
2004/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34811 Activity:high
11/9    Bush appoints Gonzales to replace Ashcroft. The majority of the
        Latinos are expected to switch to Republicans. News at 11.
        \_ Bush is a racsist!  He's just waiting to stuff the supreme
           court before he reinacts Jim Crow Laws!!1!!11
           \_ bush is not a racist but he is more than willing to
              play racial politics to enforce his agenda and to leave
              a legacy.
              \_ Did Bush create the concept of reserving <minotiry> seats
                 on the Supreme Court?
                 \_ Are you Chinese?  Do you understand the effects the opium
                    trade had on China?
        \_ Are there any good (leftist or rightist, I don't care) summaries
           of AG's positions/policies? Abortion, Patriot Act, religion, etc.
                \_ there are excellent summaries of his views on torture
                   all over the net. - danh
                   \_ I didn't expect the Spanish Inquisition!
2004/11/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/Crime, Reference/Law/Court] UID:34812 Activity:kinda low
11/10   I think that Scott Peterson is guilty, but I am disturbed that
        the judge can just replace jurors who seem to be holdouts. What's
        up with that? The person was just too smart with a law and
        medical degree and so they get booted for a 'hang 'em high' type?
        I didn't realize our justice system provided for a trial by 'your
        peers, except for that guy and that guy'.
        \_ So you're surprised for some reason to find out we have shitty
           judges in CA?
        \_ When you're a shit salesman, your peers do not hold advanced degrees
        \_ my friend works at the same bank as the pink haired tattooed
           jurist. - danh
           \_ Radio said she has 7 tats.  How do they know?
              \_ maybe they asked the 90 people she works with? - danh
                 \_ Sigh.  I was hoping for a more titilating answer.
                   \_ yeah i know you were but sometimes there is a really
                      easy explanation - danh
        \_ Juries are supposed to deliberate. The judge is allowed to remove
           jurors if they are preventing that from happening. For example, if
           a juror declares they are voting guity/not guilty, but declines to
           participate in discussions to persuade others or if one juror is
           preventing others from discussing elements of the case. Think
           debate vs. pundits yelling at each other.
2004/11/10-11 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:34813 Activity:kinda low
11/10   Now that FF 1.0 is out, has anybody gone back and compared, say,
        startup times to older versions (maybe even Phoenix)?  Is FF still
        a great deal faster than mozilla?  I remember using phoenix and
        thinking that it was maybe 2x faster for startup, as compared to
        mozilla.
        \_ I don't know about Mozilla, but startup time for FF 1.0 on OSX
           is almost exactly the same as Safari.
        \_ I use it on a G3 Macintosh and it seems a lot faster than Mozilla.
        \_ It's faster than mozilla, about the same speed or slightly faster
           than IE on Windows, depending on how many extensions you run.
           \_ I disagree with "faster than IE". I see various situations
              where IE works faster. Regular browsing and also some CGI
              script stuff we have at work. I still prefer its features
              although I never tried one of those IE wrapper/extension
              things.
              \_ I disagree with your disagreement. FF is slightly faster
                 than IE for loading up certain pages, especially if you
                 have stuff like ad filters in place. As for CGI stuff,
                 I have no idea what type of CGI you're doing, so this is
                 not a very good comparison. If you have a lot of ActiveX
                 crap running on your webpage then IE might be faster, but
                 then who wants a page full of ActiveX.
                 \_ There are ad filtering shiznits for IE based stuff too.
                    Actually what I was thinking of wasn't CGI. Just a large
                    (1.3MB) page of HTML that loads up faster in IE and feels
                    snappier. It seems to have improved a bit in 1.0 though.
                 \_ I disagree with your disagreement of his disagreement.
                 \_ http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/Dave/C/CE.html is one page
                    that IE is faster with.  It's a fairly slow link, but
                    IE shows more of the page earlier... it's pretty
                    terrible HTML though, so not much of a test.  Didn't
                    even put his hrefs in quotes.
              \_ Tabbed-browsing is super-fast!  IE does not have tabbed
                 browsing unless you install something non-standard on top.
                 On a mano-a-mano rendering test for an already open browser
                 window, I would accept that some pages render faster in IE
                 than FireFox.
2004/11/10-11 [Reference/Celebration] UID:34814 Activity:kinda low 66%like:36477
11/10   Happy Birthday, dbushong!
        \_ http://csua.com/?entry=16860
           \_ No, yer mom is ugly.  But that doesn't stop half of soda.. -John
2004/11/10 [Transportation/Airplane] UID:34815 Activity:nil
11/9    http://www.vulcaniasubmarine.com/THE%20BIONIC%20DOLPHIN.htm
        http://www.engadget.com/entry/1994668577945435
        Bionic Dolphin, BionicDolphin, I want one for Christmas!
2004/11/10 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:34816 Activity:high
11/10   Too bad Bork was Borked
        Constitutional Persons: An Exchange on Abortion
        http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0301/articles/schlueter_bork.html
        \_ why's that?  Bork is almost universally agreed to be
           way more conservative than any member of the supreme court.
           i'm glad someone that extreme isn't on the court!  no matter
           how much he prides himself on his faithful interpretation
           of the constitution.  just because he's brilliant
           doesn't mean he belongs up there.
           \_ he's a strict constructionist!  Dubya would LOOOVE him!
              \_ Bork's too old.  Dubya wants to destroy USSC credibility for
                 generations to come!
                 \_ Dubya's too late.  Earl Warren did that already.
           \_ 'agreed' - by who?  Did you even bother to read his
               article in the link?
                \_ agreed on by the entire planet.
                   \_ Yes, but *which* planet?
                \_ are you seriously going to debate with me whether most
                   of the world does not agree Bork is the meanist orniest
                   strict constructionist ever put forth before the
                   nomination process?
                   \_ We've just had an election where most of the voters
                      thought Dubya would make a better president.  Do you
                      really want to argue whether what "most of the world"
                      thinks has any connection to reality?
           \_ "Strict constructionist" == interprets the way I like
              "Activist judge" == interprets the way I don't like
              \_ strict, as in thomas, scalia, and bork = if no
                 constitutional mandate defer to the people and their
                 legislative representatives.
                 activist = I know whats best for the unwashed masses.
2004/11/10 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Others] UID:34817 Activity:nil
11/10   When Vietnam vets came home (Soldiers being spit on is
        just an urban myth)
        http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1276799/posts
2004/11/10-11 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:34818 Activity:insanely high
11/10   130-year-old Chinese fire put out
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/3978329.stm
        \_ Are you Chinese? Do you have any idea what the effect of
           a 130 year old coal fire was on China?
           \_ In SOVIET CHINA fire puts out YOU!
           \_ Are you Chinese?  Do you have any idea how much opium you could
              puff with that 130 years of coal fire?
        \_ Gives China a nice bonus for the Kyoto treaty. That's one big
           source of pollutions shut off.
           \_ Isn't that just one of many burning?
        \_ John Kerry's grandfather set it.
           \_ Uhm, before or after he enjoyed benefits from the effects of
              the opium trade in China?
                \_ Why do you hate John kerry's grandfather?
                \_ Actually, it came from a flicked-away match after
                   lighting up a fat opium spliff.
        \_ Cool! Xinjiang has 1.8 trillion tons of coal reserves.
           We must remember to always quash the Islamic separatist
           terrorists there.
           \_ We don't have to.  The Chinese have been doing that.
2004/11/10 [Uncategorized] UID:34819 Activity:nil
11/10   I think I found my favorite loser on http://www.sorryeverybody.com
        http://www.sorryeverybody.com/upload_files/se1943.jpg
        Now THAT'S a loser.
2004/11/10-11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:34820 Activity:insanely high
11/10   The bastard finally died.  Arafat RIH.
        http://www.cnn.com
        http://tinyurl.com/ufse
        \_ you're not jewish by chance, are you?
           \_ only jews hate murdering thieving terrorist thugs?  god save
              the human race if thats true....
                \_ no- only jews hate arafat and what he believed in.
                   \_ sheesh, troll.  go away trollboy.  so stupid and obvious.
                   \_  And what was that exactly?  What principles was he
                       upholding by stealing billions of dollars of his
                       own people's money?  What principles was he upholding
                       by slaughtering innocent civilians?
                        \_ when did he steal his own people's $ ?
                           \_ *blanch*  He's estimated to have stolen
                              upwards of $5 billion.  Here's a low-ball
                              from CBS. -!pp
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/07/60minutes/main582487.shtml
            \_ i hope you will make similar comments when bush, or putin
               or sharon dies. if not i hope god kills you soon.
               \_ Umm.. right.  Call me when you get back to reality.
               \_ if you can't tell the difference between arafat and these
                  three you're hopeless.  i know the motd well enough to know
                  you're probably not a troll.  that's the sad part.
        \_ Arafat was a Communist / Soviet agent.  Good riddance.
        \_ All these rumors about Arafat stealing are all lies spread
           by the Israelis.
           \_ Where else does his wife's 5-figure monthly allowance come from?
              \_ Hey, they have lots of admirers and supporters including rich
                 Arabs.  No biggie.  Probably comes from your gas guzzling
                 SUV.
        \_ Arafat was the father of the modern Palestinian statehood movement.
           All decent people despise him for that.
2004/11/10-11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:34821 Activity:very high
11/10   So, er, can anyone explain why we gave the Fallujah rebels so much
        advance warning about what we were going to do?
        \_ To prevent civilian casualties. The goal was not to destroy the
           rebels/terrorists, but to control the city. It makes it possible
           to conduct the vote in January. Rebs/terrs in the urban areas are
           the cause to most of the Coalition's headaches. The civies will
           return and the US will pump in money and fix up the city. Hearts
           and minds.
        \_ look at Grozny
        \_ Come out or I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down.
        \_ US lacks stealth anyway.  We can't even do a small raid without
           the insurgents getting tipped off, let alone a massive operation
           like Falluja.
        \_ That's the cowboy style, seriously.  Wasn't that how we fought the
           war in Vietnam?
2004/11/10-11 [Uncategorized] UID:34822 Activity:nil
11/10   What ipfw rules do I need to let passive ftp to go through?  (I mean
        on the client side.)
2017/09/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/22    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2004:November:10 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>