Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:February:20 Sunday <Saturday, Monday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2005/2/20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:36336 Activity:nil
2/20    Bush and Doug Wead?? Dug Weed, are you kidding me???
2005/2/20 [Politics, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/Jblack, Computer/SW] UID:36337 Activity:nil
2/20    Want to talk about politics? Go to freep or other web sites. jwang,
        you're slacking off and you owe me one.
        \_ Fuck your momma, asshole.
2005/2/20-21 [Politics/Domestic/911, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:36338 Activity:kinda low
2/20    Hey jwang, I have a suggestion/feature request. Rather than deleting
        politics which I know you hate, how about moving them to another file,
        like /etc/motd.politics? I appreciate the hard work you put into
        political cleansing in the past few years as it makes motd more
        compact, but it would be nice if they're moved instead of eradicated.
        You got root, and/or you got ties to root to make it
        happen. How about it jwang?
        \_ fuck you kchang.
          \_ fuck you ilyas.
             \_ fuck you meyers.
               \_ The above illustrates why conservatives are running the show
                  (cuz the other side can't get along with one another)
                  \_ I am on the liberal side now?  Someone forgot to let me
                     know.  I don't know (and don't care) what kchang's
                     politics are.  Meyers' politics are irrelevant as he is
                     an idiot. -- ilyas
                     \_ Wow, it's like you've known me my whole life!  Please
                        explain to me why foodstamps at gunpoint is bad, but
                        funding your research at gunpoint is good.  -meyers
        \_ I personally would go for that, though I think it is sort
           of a solution looking for a problem. If I am not interested
           in something, I just don't bother with it. I don't go
           around trying to decide what is appropriate for others
           to read. Actually, how about we create a motd.moderated
           and a motd.unmoderated and you can be responsible for
           maintaining motd.moderated. -ausman
           \_ This is fucking hilarious.  How many people does anyone really
              think would read motd.moderated?
                  \_ after 911 the motd went into a lockdown and everyone
                     switched over to the underground motd. Search for
                     "underground motd peterm" in the archiver and you'll see.
                     It's really no big deal, people adapt quickly.
           \_ I have a better idea.  How about instead of doing that, jwang
              gets a fucking clue? -- ilyas
              \_ go libertarian go!
           \_ Good idea, with one slight change: just made motd.unmoderated
              a symlink to motd.public.
              \_ Can we also symlink motd.moderated to /dev/null?
2005/2/20-21 [Computer/SW/OS/OsX, Computer/SW/OS/FreeBSD, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:36339 Activity:moderate
2/20    I have several gigs of files that I need to transfer from a bsd
        machine to an os x machine. What's an efficient way of doing this?
        (It's way too many files to gmail to myself.)
        \_ Umm, have you heard of ftp, http, scp, rsync, etc.? Email is one
           of the least efficient means imaginable for this kind of thing.
        \_ rsync, followed by tar | ssh, followed by create a tar/gz file and
           use any of the other methods.
                \_ Thanks, but I ended up just using ftp (dont' know why I
                   didn't thinking of it myself). -op
2005/2/20-22 [Recreation/Travel/LasVegas] UID:36340 Activity:high
2/20    Hunter S. Thompson, RIP.
        \_ Suicide.  This sucks.  Sucks sucks sucks.
           \_ Is anyone surprised?
              \- this seems an appropriate end. "talkin 'about my generation...
                 hope i die before i get old" and all that. --psb
        \_ "This may be the year when we finally come face to face with
            ourselves; finally just lay back and say it---that we are really
            just a nation of 220 million used car salesmen with all the money
            we need to buy guns and no qualms at all about killing anybody
            else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable."
            -- HST: Fear And Loathing On The Campaign Trail 1972
        \_ "There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high
            powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird
            to live, and too rare to die."
            -- HST: Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas
        \_ "Old elephants limp off to the hills to die; old Americans go out
            to the highway and drive themselves to death with huge cars."
            -- HST: Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas
        \_ "Yesterday's weirdness is tomorrow's reason why."
        \_ "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long
            plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die
            like dogs. There's also a negative side."
            \_ Man, I'm going to start paraphrasing that as my experience
               in the software industry.
        \_ Wow, this is really a loss. If I had some ether, I'd inhale
           it now, in memorium.
        \_ This is really depressing.  "Fear and Loathing on the Campaign
           Trail" is one of the best books ever.  Makes you wonder why he
           decided to do it now.
        \_ Who is Hunter Thompson and why should we care?
           \_ He was a writer and journalist.  Whether you love him or not,
              it's hard to argue with the statement that there never has been
              and never will be anyone like him.  For a summary, put his
              name into, but to really get an idea, go
              read "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas".
           \_ get a clue.  -tom
              \_ I've never heard of Thompson. Based on a few random
                 links on google he sounds like some half baked reporter
                 type. Yes its sad that he killed himself, but lots of
                 people kill themselves everyday and it doesn't make
                 the motd.
                 \_ Seriously go away.  If you're really curious, go read
                    his stuff and come back.
                 \_ Dude, read him, don't read him, like him, don't
                    like him, whatever. You can do whatever you want.
                    Why does it bother you if those of us who were fans
                    and admirers of him and his work commiserate a bit?
                        - ether man
2005/2/20-22 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany] UID:36341 Activity:high
2/20    My professor said during WW2, about 1/4 of the congressmen/senate/
        politicians were publicly supportive of the Nazi regime. Isn't that
        kind of high? Can it actually be true, or he's just exaggerating?
        \_ Your prof is full of shit.  Do your own research on the German-
           American Bund and Charles Lindbergh's activities in the late 1930s.
           Also look at the isolationist movement and its association with
           the Willkie 1940 campaign.  There was a fair amount of sympathy
           for nazi Germany in the late 1930s; there was far more drive
           towards keeping the US out of European conflicts (FDR had to ram
           Lend-Lease through Congress against some stiff opposition.)  Your
           prof is making the very common revisionist mistake of taking three
           different but related philosophies (isolationism, the sympathetic
           view of the krats, and outright nazi-hugging) and lumping them
           view of the krauts, and outright nazi-hugging) and lumping them
           into the same brown pot.  -John
        \_ During the 1930s to the early 40s most people in the country were
           for segregation and there were a couple million KKK members. Also,
           Charles Lindbergh was publicly for the Nazi regime. So a lot of
           people thought that the Nazi regime was doing the right thing.
           Charles Lindbergh was publicly for the Nazi regime. So a lot of
           people thought that the Nazi regime was doing the right thing.
           \_ It goes beyond the racial and anti-semitism. Hitler was seen
              as creating prosperity and order to a Europe many Americans
              felt was going to heck in a handbasket. When Germans started
              invading, Americans felt it was none of their business and
              if it was, Hitler was just straightening out the internal
              infighting and bickering of those countries stuck in the
              remnants of the Depression.
        \_ In the 30's, quite believable.  Successively less likely after
           Poland, Benelux, France, and the Battle of Britain.  Stretches
           credulity after Pearl Harbor.  Are you sure he said during and
           not before?
           \_ Hint: WW2 started well before Pearl Harbor....
              \_ Fair enough.  Did the professor say during or at the
                 start of?  During implies through the entire war.
                 % dict during
                 During \Dur"ing\, prep. [Orig., p. pr. of dure.]
                 In the time of; as long as the action or existence of; as,
                 during life; during the space of a year.
                 \_ Probably through most of the American part of the war
                    too. Germany wasn't seen as a pariah state. There was
                    a lot of appeal to the fascist state to Americans.
                    \_ This is a pretty provocative claim.  Reference please.
        \_ In the beginning it was more about anti-communism and the Nazis
           reasserting Germany as a top power after being in the shits for
           so long after WW1.
        \_ Madison Square garden was packed with pro-Nazi rallies.  Of
           course, most leftists in America were fervent supporters
           of Uncle Joe, who was equal to if not worse than the Nazis.
           As for anti-communist, you have to remember the Nazi was
           the Socialist party in Germany.  There are no pronounced
           differences between the political tenets of the Nazis
           and the Communists, except for a violent overthrough of
           the ruling class.
           \_ You are misinformed.  National socialism advocates state
              direction of economic resources, not eradication of private
              ownership.  Also, militarism and a regimentation of society by
              the state is seen as an ultimate goal.  Communism, on the other
              hand, does not specifically advocate discrimination based on
              ethnicity, or the militaristic expansion of the state (rather,
              that of the ideology.)  The totalitarian state is seen as a
              necessary interlude on the way to a utopian "dictatorship of the
              proletariat."  Maybe you are confusing stalinism with the
              nominal communist ideal?  As for "rallyes", maybe you are
              referring to a February 1939 rally by the German-American Bund
              (who were functionally nazis) and associated organizations (such
              as the Christian Front.)  Read up on HUAC investigations of
              Fritz Kuhn and the Bund.  -John
              \_ Maybe should reread what you wrote, because it is self
                 contradictory in parts, and flies in the face of history.
                 I was speaking to the Nazis and Soviets, who politically
                 were not that different, EXCEPT, as you say, for a violent
                 overthrow of the ruling class. The notion that there were no
                 pogroms in Russia is silly.
                 LOL "confusing stalinism for the communist ideal",
                 ok comrade!.  Maybe on a piece of paper they are
                 different constructs but we live in the real world.
                 \_ "no pronounced differences except for a violent overthrow
                    of the ruling classes" is your wording.  You did not say
                    "Soviets", you said "communism".  As for pogroms, (a) do
                    do point out where I said there were none, (b) these took
                    place mainly in Czarist times, (c) ethnic discrimination
                    is not a part of communist doctrine.  And why are you
                    making me out to be an apologist for either ideology?  And
                    what does "LOL" mean?  Is this a political science term?
                    They didn't teach me that at Cal, sorry.  Try again,
                    young padawan.  -John
                    \_ Comrade, we welcome you!  - Chicom troll
                    \_ Comrade John, we welcome you!  - Chicom troll
                       \_ Chicom troll you're back!  *snif* We missed you!
                          Welcome!  -John
                    \_ well I had referred to Stalin in the previous
                       sentence, so infer what you will.  Look, I'm not
                       interested in debating the finer points of
                       dialectical materialism with experts such as
                       yourself.  However, what you are doing, perhaps
                       unwittingly, is trying to draw a distinction
                       between the Soviets and Nazis in order to
                       redeem Communism.  The mantra is Communism
                       is really a worthwhile endeavor, moreover none of
                       20th century mass murderers were Communist but
                       something else. You ignore historical
                       \_ Vladimir Ulyanov was a communist.  Want to know how
                          many people he killed? -- ilyas
                       realities for what someone writes on a
                       piece of paper (or on Wikipedia, whatever you
                       read).  If you can't see the implicit contradiction
                       in the second sentence you wrote in the previous
                       post, maybe your deception is intentional.
                       If your entire argument rests on my intentional
                       omission of the hyper-racial component of
                       the Nazi's flavor of Communism, all I can say
                       is duh.
                       \_ The Soviets didn't call themselves communist. -tom
                       \_ The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics didn't call
                          themselves communist. -tom
                          \_ They make a distiinction between the communist
                             society which is their utopian objective and the
                             communist party which (should) struggles toward
                             that goal.
                             \_ Horse manure.  The Soviets were no more
                                interested in communism than Bush is
                                interested in "freedom."  They used
                                some of communism's rhetoric to help
                                themselves sieze power.  -tom
                                themselves seize power.  -tom
                                \_ Did I say they were (or were not)?  I just
                                   wanted to point out that the communists in
                                   USSR most certainly do call themselves
                                   communist when they speak English.  To say
                                   otherwise would just be silly.  But
                                   maybe you wanted say that they did not claim
                                or consider their society to be in the ultimate
                                communist phase yet.  I took that into account.
                       \_ You are putting your own words in John's mouth.
                          (He is no less a fervent anticommie than you are.)
                          Unless you just choose to define everyone and
                          every idealogy you dislike as communists, there is no
                          reason to identify Nazism and communism.  Communism
                          ideal looks to the "next" step after capitalism and
                          struggles for an "enlightened" society without class
                          and property gradient.  (I am not suggesting that is
                          desirable).  Nazism ideal looks "back" to the age of
                          noble (= white) savages roaming Nordic forests and
                          struggles for a planet ruled by pure "Aryans" in
                          harmony with maiden nature.  (On this I disagree with
                          John.)  In practice, the implementation of both
                          \_ Huh?  Why?  Isn't that what I said?  And thank
                             you for your assertion, I ought to hang on to the
                             claim that I am somehow trying to "redeem"
                             communism.  I suppose some people might
                             equate trying to know facts about a philosophy
                             with justifying it; it's still funny :-) -John
                             \_ You said "militarism and a regimentation of
                                society by the state is seen as an ultimate
                                goal" (of nazi.)  I don't know if that was the
                                ultimate of Hitler, but it certainly was not
                                the ultimate nazi ideal.
                          create regimes that are quite similar and kill lots
                          of people, but in that they are far from alone.
                       \_ What you are doing, perhaps unwittingly, is drawing
                          a destinction between the pro-fascist American Right
                          and Nazism. By confusing the difference between
                          Communism and Nazism, you throw FUD into the very
                          real concerns some in America have about the
                          growing populist, militarist and violent Right
                          Wing movement in America. How many shopkeeper
                          windows have to be smashed before we call it the
                          American Kristnacht?
                          \_ You probably meant 'Kristalnacht,' unless you were
                             making a lame joke along the lines of
                             'Christ-nacht.'  Feel free to go on with your
                             very real concerns now. -- ilyas
                             \_ "The best way to talk to a liberal is
                                with a baseball bat." -Ann Coulter
                                And more and more people are taking up
                                her suggestion.
                                \_ Oh please.  While not a huge Ms. Coulter
                                   fan, I must remark you are straying
                                   dangerously close to accusing John Solomon
                                   of being a proto-Nazi because he suggested
                                   the baseball bat as the proper way of
                                   dealing with spammers.  Get a clue.  I
                                   wonder what Aaron would be in your book.
                                   I guess he can't be a Nazi because he's a
                                   liberal, but he did fantasize about
                                   gang-banking conservatives 50-to-1.  Also,
                                   please give me some instances where 'more
                                   and more' people are taking the baseball
                                   bat to their liberal neighbors.  Urls
                                   would be nice. -- ilyas
                                   \_ Last I checked Aaron wasn't selling
                                      millions of books and on the news
                                      as a leftie talking head. Let me know
                                      when he is. Also, he is not the
                                      ally of the people in power, you know
                                      the ones with a legal monopoly on force.
                                      Here are a few urls, there are many
                                      more if you bother to look:
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:February:20 Sunday <Saturday, Monday>