Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:April:05 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2005/4/5 [Uncategorized] UID:37066 Activity:kinda low
5/4     Bovine rectal palpitation simulator
        http://purvadra.notlong.com  -John
        \_ I just want to express my appreciation that this time you actually
           attatched a warning label to your cow's ass link.
        \_ Does the guy on the right in the picture have his pants down?
2005/4/5 [Health/Men] UID:37067 Activity:high
4/5     How many 5-year-olds could you knock out?  http://tinyurl.com/68e6n
        \_ Can they use a bat?
           \_ No foreign objects.
              \_ Pick up one kid with each hand, then swing them on the other
                 kids as fast as you can before you get dizzy.
              \_ Can I use my erect penis as a bat?  It's not foreign object.
                 \_ Michael, is that you?
              \_ Ma baat's made 'n da YOU-ESS-EAY.
        \_ What's "standard-issue cup"?
        \_ When they are about 15' away, I'd rush a group of them, try and
           take out a leader or two. I think it's harder than it originally
           seems, because they will be trained to cover their faces if your
           try and punch them in the face. and if you try and pick one up,
           they could probably try to leech onto you, so that others can take
           you out. Originally, I thought I could handle 20, but I'm lowering
           my estimate to 15.
        \_ 5 year olds? They can barely do anything. I guess it depends on
           how suicidal they are. They could easily die from a grown man's
           kicks and punches. So it comes down to sheer fatigue. And even
           if I just lay on the ground doing nothing I'm not sure what
           they would do to knock me out. Bite my privates I guess. The
           question doesn't make sense because real 5 year olds could not
           be motivated to behave that way.
                \_ You get a cup.  But a pack of crazed 5 year olds could more
                   damage than most people would think.  Think of being
                   attacked by a pack of rabid Chihuahas (sp?).
        \_ Did you see the picture for user "Schneids"? Best animated gif
           EVUR!
2005/4/5 [Computer/SW/Languages/Java] UID:37068 Activity:very high
4/5     What defines lower class, middle class, and higher class? Income?
        Income relative to spending? Tax bracket? A combination of all? What
        does middle class mean? Someone who has X deviation from the median
        or average income?
        \_ I believe there are many ways.  Income quintiles, for one.
        \_ Whim.
        \_ The political bias of the person defining the classes defines
           the classes.
        \_ They really need a new category: Dynasty Class, families
           who have a lot of influence on government policies.
        \_ I define it.
        \_ I define it. And you are definitely lower class.
        \- I dont think it is a great book, but you could look at
           Paul Fussel's book "Class". --psb
           http://csua.org/u/bl5
2005/4/5 [Computer/HW/Scanner] UID:37069 Activity:low
4/5     I have a 4x6 photograph (print not slide) that I want to have scanned
        and printed at 11x17.  Can I expect that it will look grainy, or will
        it be hard to tell without close inspection?  Also any recommendations
        for a place to have it digitized? --jwm
        \_ better to do it from the negative at super high resolution.
           \_ Yes, but I'm pretty sure I don't have them.
              \_ expect some blurring.  If you have access to a decent scanner,
                 try it and see.  If you scan as high resolution as you can,
                 then drop it down to somewhere between 300-600 dpi when you
                 enlarge it, you may minimize the blurring. -pp
        \_ If you don't have the negative, use a regular decent scanner and
           scan at a good resolution. Then upsize it in photoshop. Should be
           reasonable. Or, you can just hand over the prints to a shop and
           they will do the printing for you. It'll cost more. In either case
           don't have high expectations.
2005/4/5 [Science, Politics] UID:37070 Activity:very high
4/5     In one line, how do you determine if X is a power of 2?  If you already
        know the answer, please don't answer.
        \_ echo "is X a power of 2?" > mail mrsmartguy@hostname.berkeley.edu
        \_ In one line of what?  If it's one line of C code, I just figured out
           the answer.
        \_ One line doesn't mean what you think it means.
        \_ bool power_of_2 = (x == 1) ? true : (x == 2) ? true : (x == 4) ?
           true : (x == 8) ? true : (x == 16) ? true : (x == 32) ? true : (x ==
           64) ? true : (x == 128) ? true : (x == 256) ? true : (x == 512) ?
           true : (x == 1024) ? true : (x == 2048) ? true : (x == 4096) ? true
           : (x == 8192) ? true : (x == 16384) ? true : (x == 32768) ? true :
           (x == 65536) ? true : (x == 131072) ? true : (x == 262144) ? true :
           (x == 524288) ? true : (x == 1048576) ? true : (x == 2097152) ? true
           : (x == 4194304) ? true : (x == 8388608) ? true : (x == 16777216) ?
           true : (x == 33554432) ? true : (x == 67108864) ? true : (x ==
           134217728) ? true : (x == 268435456) ? true : (x == 536870912) ?
           true : (x == 1073741824) ? true : (x == 2147483648) ? true : false;
           \_ Are you assuming a certain number of bits in an integer?
              \_ Both solutions are nonportable.
              \_ Yes.  I'm mocking the person asking the question.  His
                 question doesn't have an answer.
                 \_ (f && (!(f & (f-1))))
                    And a better way to ask this question is can you
                    determine if a number is a power of two in O(1) time.
                    \_ None of your operations are truly O(1).
                       A naive solution like doing a bunch of & operations
                       is just as O(1) by your criteria.
                       \_ In modern processors all 3 operations
                          ( &, &&, and -) are constant time.
                          That makes it O(1).  The naive solution on the
                          other hand is O(n) where n is the number of bits
                          in an integer.  If you double the width of the
                          integer the time to check doubles.  That's not
                          O(1) in any way shape or form.
                          \_ That's my point. Those operations are only
                             constant time up to a certain number of bits.
                             After that it's going to cost you, e.g. with
                             bigints.
                          \_ By the same reasoning, lg(n)<64 so it's constant
                             time as well.
                             \_ I think it is pretty obvious you don't
                                understand bigO notation.
                    \_ So you're assuming unsigned and twos-complement?
                       \_ If it's unsigned, it wouldn't be two's complement,
                          would it?
                    \_ That's what I was looking for but I'm curious if there
                       are smart ways to do it in other languages. -op
                     \_ I'm assuming unsigned.  f>0 is a simple signed check.
                        Twos complement isn't an assumption, as negative
                        numbers aren't ever an issue.
                    \_ -2147483648 is not a power of 2.
                       \_ ((f > 0) && (!(f & (f-1))))  -- !PP
        \_ power_of_2 = (rindex(sprintf(%b, x),'1')==1) ? true : false;
           assuming I put the parenthesis in the right place and x>1?
           of course, I'm a tard and don't really understand bitwise ops.
           \_ Ugh, why do people write "boolExpr ? true : false"?  It's
              redundant.  Is "(boolExpr ? true : false) ? true : false" even
              clearer for you?
        \_ I suspect your solution doesn't actually work.
        \_ Is it safe to say that any solution will take O(n) time considering
           an arbritary number of bits?
         \_ I suspect so, but I'm not sure --person who gave O(1) forumla above
2005/4/5 [Reference/Religion, Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:37071 Activity:insanely high
4/5     I need some URL to forward to co-workers to cheer them up.
        Please help, offer suggestions.
        \_ http://csua.berkeley.edu/motd
        \_ http://csua.com/Recreation/Humor
           http://csua.com/Recreation/Stripclub
        \_ http://www.prettyhotbabes.com
           \_ GODAMNIT. This is NOT work safe.  -pissed
              \_ This may be considered an intelligence test. You failed it.
              \_ Doesn't everyone at soda work for a porn site or sex shop
                 by now? That means that http://foxnews.com may no longer be work
                 safe but porn sites will be.
                 \_ Funny, since foxnews seems to maximize the hot babes as
                    often as possible (stories, female reporters, etc.).
        \_ http://www.partiallyclips.com
        \_ http://www.finalexit.org
        \_ http://www.asianthumbs.org/main.php
        \_ None of these site cheered them up. Furthermore, they all
           think I have bad taste, though my manager has not said anything.
           Please come up with better links and I will forward them manana.
           \_ http://www.prozac.com it REALLY WORKS!
        \_ http://www.hanzismatter.com
2005/4/5 [Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:37072 Activity:insanely high
4/5     From Lockbox to Fiction, in four short years.
        http://csua.org/u/bl1
        \_ Social security is dying, and it's a costly idea. Why don't we just
           go back to the old Chinese way where you support your family
           members at all costs. And if you messed up and didn't have good
           loving educated children who can support you when you're old,
           it's all your fault. The Chinese way is a compromise between
           Libertarian's "every man for himself" and government imposed
           "All men get equal income" concept.
           \_ Let's bring back debtors prisons and indentured servitude while
              we're at it.
           \_ Because we are self-centered.  We won't do it unless we are
              forced to.
           \_ Wow.  I removed my reply because I thought you were trolling,
              but now I think you might be sincere:
              What's your support for "is dying"?  Social Security HAS worked
              for 7 decades, and as long as the current freaks don't fuck it
              up, it'll work for decades more.
              \_ It's dying because the projected population grow was off and
                 current actuarials have a hard time balancing it without
                 either cutting benefits or raising tax, and given the way
                 the current administration is going, they're just gonna kill it
                 \_ What's your source about projected population growth?
                    You're right about the current administration, but the
                    only people saying there are "difficult" actuarial problems
                    are ... the current administration!  You're buying a lie.
           \_ That doesn't solve anything. People who depend on SS now probably
              don't have wealthy kids either. And who wants to pay for old
              parents AND their kids at the same time? And what's "Chinese"
              about that system? Do you think westerners had social security
              for centuries or what? You're pretty dumb.
              \_ I think it's pretty obvious the Chinese are better at having
                 kids than most everyone else.
                 \_ Well whatever. The oldest system would be like what many
                    native american tribes were like, and other places. The
                    old people help cook, make clothes, care for kids etc.
                    while parents are off hunting and gathering and pillaging
                    other tribes. Trouble is old people don't want to work
                    anymore. Anyway SS isn't quite "government pays everyone"
                    since in theory you're paying into the system while you
                    work. Too bad they typically set it up as a pyramid scheme.
                    Like in Germany they don't have enough young workers to
                    pay the old people's services. But that's just their own
                    stupid fault for not taxing those old people enough while
                    they were young and driving Mercedes and taking their 6
                    week vacations and invading Poland.
                    \_ I thought invading Poland was their six week vacation.
              \_ old [Confusius] Chinese way is when you have respect for
                 the elderly and treat them the same way that you want your
                 children to treat you. That is, you and your wife live with
                 grandpas/grandmas and cook and eat together. And there is a
                 lot of interactions between different generations. It is a
                 world of intense interactions, cooperation, and assimilation.
                 However, much of that is lost in modernized, Westernized
                 China where people just want privacy, individualism and
                 independence. Kids no longer give a damn about old people.
                 They just want to play first person shooter games and
                 listen to hip-hop music filled with sex, guns, and profanity.
                 It's no longer about the family. It's all about me me me.
                 Sure, China is enjoying all the new material goods they're
                 getting, but spiritually, Confusius is dead.
                 \_ Confucius, not Confusius!
           \_ Doesn't China has some gigantic looming pension liability
              problem?
              \_ China after 1950 != old Chinese ways.
              \_ Nah ... in China, it's simple, you just let the poor
                 old people rot and fade away.  You get sick, you just
                 die.  No cost.  It's capitalism at it's rawest form.
              \_ Their biggest problem is going to be the male:female ratio.
           \_ There are so many minor ways to keep SS going forever.  You
              can always raise the retirement age and fix the problem.  I
              don't know why Bush keeps dissing the SS return.  3% return
              on top of inflation guaranteed isn't bad.  You can tax SS
              payments, you can raise or eliminate the SS tax cap.  You
              can increase SS taxes (like what they did in the 1980s).  Etc.
              It is NOT broken.
              \_ The easiest solution it to pull the $90K payroll limitation.
                 Don't need to change the retirement age, can claim that
                 everybody now pays an "equal" share (equal benefits? Ha!),
                 and it keeps SS "safe" for the foreseeable future.
                 \_ Sure. Tax the wealthy. That's always the solution,
                    isn't it? As long as people who make under $90K don't
                    have to share in the pain, right? It's not they will
                    \_ Uh.  Right now, those making over 90K aren't "sharing
                       the pain"... Dumbass.
                    benefit more from it or that they tend to rely more on
                    SS.
                    \_ Uh.  Right now, those making over 90K aren't "sharing
                       the pain"... Dumbass.
                       \_ Yes they are, dumbass! It's called the tax on
                          the first 90K that they make!
                          \_ how is taxing someone who makes $100K the same
                             amount as someone who makes $1M "sharing the
                             pain"?  -tom
2005/4/5 [Health/Disease/AIDS] UID:37073 Activity:kinda low
4/5     http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4413151.stm
        Sorry partha, no more brothels for you.
        \_ The Partha imports his own to South Asia.
2005/4/5-8 [Computer/HW/Printer] UID:37074 Activity:nil
4/5     For those laser printers with multiple interfaces (ethernet, usb,
        parallel), can you connect different computers to different
        interfaces at the same time?  I am interested in one of those
        multifunction printers.  I want the printer on ethernet for
        multiple computers, but also want to use scan and fax functions
        (which only works over usb) on one of the computers.
                \_ It probably depends on the printer.  I have a Dell 3100cn
                and this works fine.  I also tried it on my Lexmark Inkjet
                which had both USB and Parallel, and the manual said NOT
                to connect to both, and it worked.  You would sometimes have
                to power cycle the printer.  -ax
        \_ Why not just hook it up via USB to one box and make that a print
           server?  That way you'll also have tidier print queues, etc.  If
           it's a unix box, CUPS + Samba will do nicely.  -John
        \_ not a laser, but I've used the print and scan of an HP
           officejet 71xx via jetdirect ethernet from a linux PC.  I know
           windows PCs could use the same printer over the LAN. I never
           tried to have dualing scans to see how it resolved contention.
2005/4/5-8 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Reference/Tax] UID:37075 Activity:high
4/5     Pope JP2's death reminds me of Ronald Reagan's death. I don't agree
        with most of Reagan's policies and in fact I think they're stupid.
        Tax break for the super wealthy, military spending explosion,
        aggressive [redneck] foreign policies, etc. However, when he's on
        camera he's so nice looking and charming and I just can't help it
        liking him. Ditto with JP2. I don't agree with b-control and other
        crap JP2 says but I still like him for some reason.
        \_ A tax cut that moved the highest bracket from 70% to 28%.  70%!!?!
           How did we ever allow that?  It's immoral!
           \_ You shouldn't tax the rich, they CREATE jobs and equal
              opportunity for everyone! Just look at Microsoft, WalMart,
              and Dell! Every employee looks so happy and they REALLY believe
              in their company! Let's all turn America into one big happy
              corporate family. Yeah!
              \_ You're being dense.  Nobody's arguing against taxing "the
                 rich" (what the hell kind of dumbshit stupid, ill-educated
                 American fat-buttocked Fox viewer demagoguery is that,
                 anyway?)  The point is that taking 70% of a person's
                 earnings is, besides being counter-productive (as it removes
                 the motivation to excel, etc. etc.) is just theft.  Please
                 stop it with the "anyone who argues against fleecing teh
                 r1ch is a bloated plutocrat pig, workers of the world
                 unite!" horse shit, it's unworthy.  -John
                 \_ According to your argument, any tax at all is "theft."
                    What is the difference between taxing at 70% and 50%?
                    50% and 20%? Do you think that all taxes should be
                    abolished because they are "theft"? Why not? What is
                    magical about 70%? Plenty of countries tax at
                    a marginal 70% rate and somehow manage to muddle through.
                    \_ I believe that any tax taken, regardless of rate, by
                       a government that does not do its utmost to use its
                       citizens' money responsibly and conservatively is
                       theft.  Nowhere from my statement can you infer that I
                       belive "any tax at all is theft".  Furthermore, while
                       there is a large gray area, there comes a point at
                       which taxation is oppressive.  I maintain that, once
                       more of your earnings are taken from you as taxes than
                       go to you, a boundary of what is reasonable has been
                       crossed.  And I believe you used the magic word,
                       "muddle".  Is that something to strive for?  -John
              \_ Microsoft has made a lot of very ordinary Americans very
                 wealthy.
                 \_ The Waltons were smarter than Gates, they made sure their
                    money didn't leak out as in the case of M$.
           \_ It is inhumane to tax the super rich. Imagine the pain
              Paris Hilton has to go through when she can only afford to buy a
              BMW 740i instead of a Ferrari Testarosa, or the suffering of
              George W. Bush when he can only play at a cheapo 4 star golf
              course instead of a full fledged 5 star golf course. It's
              simply unusual and cruel punishment.
              \_ It doesn't even cause that. They still afford what they want.
              \_ Don't forget Paris resorted to making herself a porn in order
                 to afford a BMW 740i.  That's cruel punishment.
           \_ Do you not understand how marginal tax rates work?
              \_ Yes I do.  A 70% marginal rate is immoral.
                 \_ What a strange and twisted version of ethics you must have.
           \_ I could argue it's immoral to allow billionares to exist when
              there are people starving.
              \_ It's immoral to allow my neighbor to own a Ferrari when I
                 only drive an Audi.  What the fuck kind of argument is this?
                 Spawning season on planet thick?  -John
                 \_ Having to drive an Audi is not very much like starving
                    to death. Your analogy is flawed.
                    \_ Of course it's flawed, it's downright silly.  Now tell
                       me where exactly the line is.  Until then you have no
                       argument.  And from whom should we expropriate assets
                       to feed all these people?  Billionaires?  Millionaires?
                       Over $500k?  $100k?  Yes it sucks that there's poverty
                       and starvation and hurt and whatnot and we should all
                       do what we can, but please, do give me a working model
                       that relies on a Robin Hood approach.  -John
                       \_ Just because I cannot give you an exact answer
                          without further experimentation doesn't mean
                          that no experiment is worth doing. Sweden is
                          a pretty good working model, I would say. So
                          are Canada, Denmark, The Netherlands, Germany,
                          France, Italy and even Switzerland.
                          \_ I am going to guess that you subscribe to the
                             utopian ideals of Europe and Canada instead
                             of witnessing the realities.
                             \_ No, I have been to all these countries.
                                Canada and The Netherlands are especially nice.
                                \_ Holland *USED* to be nice. My mother
                                   was born there and lived there until 16.
                                   All the rest of her family is still there.
                                   They used to always make fun of how bad
                                   things like education, crime, and medicine
                                   were in the US. Now, many of them are
                                   shopping for houses here in the US. It's
                                   not nice like it once was. The system is
                                   collapsing.
                          \_ Sweden has been haemorrhaging educated
                             professionals for years who forsake it for the
                             UK (!) and its lower taxes.  All Scandinavian
                             countries have massive immigration problems, and
                             can't cope (as the rest of Europe) with their
                             overburdened welfare systems.  Switzerland has
                             way lower taxes and stingy welfare, and will face
                             the same problems.  You're right about "it's
                             worth trying something".  But blind truisms about
                             redistribution of wealth at the expense of "the
                             rich" isn't it.  Some people will always simply
                             be wealthier than others--life isn't fair; you
                             cannot enforce uniform economic equality.  -John
                             \_ No one is arguing for enforced equality. That
                                is a straw man you made up to avoid talking
                                about the real issue: what is a fair top
                                marginal rate. You claim that 70% is immoral,
                                but have provided no evidence as to why that
                                is so, other than your feelings. Sweden is
                                doing fine economically actually, much better
                                than the rest of Europe. And "the line" to
                                answer your previous question, is that point
                                where society provides enough resources to
                                keep anyone from starving to death. I don't
                                think it is too much to ask from those who
                                are the primary beneficiaries of that same
                                society.
                                \_ OK.  To be honest, I would add "a roof over
                                   everyone's head" and even "education" to
                                   that mix.  I simply massively criticize the
                                   extreme polemicization of the idea of
                                   forced redistribution--i.e. the systematic
                                   fleecing of "the rich" rather than a
                                   decent tax system (which nobody's arguing
                                   against.)  Governments are massively
                                   inefficient organizations, and it's wrong
                                   to use the classic European welfare states
                                   as examples of how to do things right--they
                                   have been either stagnant or coming apart
                                   at the seams.  Yes, Holland is nice, but as
                                   a visitor don't let utopian visions cloud
                                   your impressions.  I spend a lot of time
                                   in W. Europe and the UK, and there are too
                                   many problems to elaborate on, a lot of
                                   them caused by over-bureaucratization and
                                   crazy government taxation & fiscal
                                   intervention.  -John
                                   intervention.  Oh yeah, and as for Sweden,
                                   you've probably read the Rijksbank report.
                                   Look at http://tinyurl.com/6ut95 too. -John
                                   \_ Communist! Seriously, by American
                                      standards you are some kind of loonie
                                      liberal.
                                      liberal. I have no doubt that bad
                                      government is bad. I see lots of
                                      bureaucratic bungling in San Francisco,
                                      and we have much less to work with than
                                      they do in the Scandanavian countries.
                                      But the solution to this is to make
                                      the government institutions more
                                      efficient. The Swedes seem to like
                                      their government just fine, so they
                                      must be doing something right. Thanks
                                      for the link, btw, I had not seen that.
                                      http://csua.org/u/bm1 (The Economist)
                                      Sweden is the second fastest growing
                                      economy on that list. And if you go
                                      by GDP/capita, which is what really
                                      matters to a person, they rival the US.
It's growing quickly, the quality of life is great, and according to many _/
economic indicators, they're just dandy.  However, this relies on adherence to
a social contract which is slowly coming apart, cultural homogeneity (ditto),
and enough people working to keep up the fun (ditto.)  Economic excellence,
entrepreneurship, and personal mobility seem disparaged (i.e. don't get above
your station, sit around having smiling blond babies.)  Same in many European
countries.  The Swedes (except for aforementioned educated professionals who
are fleeing in droves to avoid taxes) love it, which is great.  This model
would not work in many other places--note how high taxes, bureaucracy and
govt. inefficiency have just about destroyed the German economy--and frankly
it frightens me just a bit.  And yes I probably am a bit of a commie in some
respects--I think that (a) I deserve quality and accountability for _my_ $$$,
and (b) it doesn't have to cost an arm and a leg.  -John
                             \_ I would argue that the massive deficits of
                                the USA give a false sense of economic
                                health.
              \_ please do.
              \_ that's not very Randian of you
                 \_ Or very Jeffersonian.
                    \_ "The property of this country is absolutely concentred
                       in a very few hands ...
                       Another means of silently lessening the inequality
                       of property is to exempt all from taxation below a
                       certain point, and to tax the higher portions of
                       property in geometrical progression as they rise."
                       -Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1785
                       \_ He was referring to land, which is truly a limited
                          resource.
                          \_ So would you agree to cut taxes on one's primary
                             home, and ramp up tax rates on 2nd, 3rd homes
                             etc? Currently we have the opposite. The tax
                             situation is better on a 2nd investment home
                             and there's no limits.
                             \_ Sounds reasonable to me. -pp
                             \_ Just cut down on Asian immigration.
                                They're like the Jews in the 30s, buying up
                                cheap land (Silicon Valley land is cheap
                                relative to expensive Tokyo and HK properties)
                                and screwing up us natives. Go final solution!
                                \_ Somehow I doubt you're a "native"
                                \_ Price per sq ft living space in SF is going
                                   to beat HK soon.
                          \_ Don't forget the previous paragraph to his letter:
                             (I am talking about "people starving" vs.
                             billionaires and morality, not necessarily
                             Jefferson's views on an income tax)
                       "As soon as I had got clear of the town I fell in with
                       a poor woman walking at the same rate with myself and
                       going the same course.  Wishing to know the condition of
                       the laboring poor I entered into conversation with her.
                       ... As we had walked together near a mile and she has so
                       far served me as a guide, I gave her, on parting, 24
                       sous. She burst into tears of a gratitude which I could
                       perceive was unfeigned because she was unable to utter a
                       word. ... This little attendrissement, with the solitude
                       of my walk, led me into a train of reflections on that
                       unequal ision of property which occasions the numberless
                       instances of wretchedness which I had observed in this
                       country and is to be observed all over Europe."
                    \_ "The rich alone use imported articles, and on these
                       alone the whole taxes of the General Government are
                       levied ...
                       We shall soon see the final extinction of our national
                       debt, and liberation of our revenues for the defense
                       and improvement of our country. These revenues will be
                       levied entirely on the rich. ... The farmer will see his
                       government supported, his children educated, and the
                       face of his country made a paradise by the
                       contributions of the rich alone, without his being
                       called on to spend a cent from his earnings."
              \_ Look, the Gov't should never get more of my income than I do.
                 That's simple enough.
                 \_ the government didn't get 70% of anyone's income.  Get
                    a clue.  -tom
                    \_ I am sure it did happen. Why not?
                    \_ Of the income in the bracket.  Are you sure no one ever
                       had an effective tax rate of >50%?
                       \_ My overall tax rate, including state and federal
                          was about 40% in 2000, so I would not be surprised
                          at all if someone had a 50%+ rate at some point
                          when the tax rate was higher.
                          \_ Don't forget to add 8% sales tax, > 50% gas taxes,\
                             etc, etc.
                          \_ Don't forget to add 8% sales tax, > 50% gas taxes,
                             etc, etc.
        \_ They were both previously actors.
           \_ Ah-nold!
           \- As I have said many times, this is really at core a conversation
              about "what we owe each other". Well, there are other ways to
              formulate the core question, but it isnt a conversation about
              tax policy alone. You might want to for example google for
              "wilt chamberlain, nozick, liberty upsets patterns". I dont
              have a problem with people being wealthy and in general a very
              asymmetric distribution of wealth. And I also dont think you
              can do much about say the wealthy having better health care
              than the avg person. But in certain areas, we can do something
              about keeping a level playing field or try to have a "floor".
              While the Nozick view about voluntary contribution to Wilt ->
              nobody can complain when he is rich, is complelling, these
              claims that spending money = free speech liberty in a political
              context, so there should not be any limits on campaing spending
              seems iffy and other areas where the state can do something
              about buying influence [like say legacy considerations in
              college admissions, buying organs etc.]. And if you do want to
              tlk about tax policy, let's look at what people actually pay
              rather than one number, the highest marginal tax rate.
        \_ Although I agree 70% is way too high, there should definitely
           be market controls to regulate the free market (not necessarily
           taxes).  I believe a "completely" free Market will eventually lead
           to a caste society with a limited middle class.  The gap in pay
           between average workers and large company CEOs surpassed
           300-to-1 in 2003, but in 1982, it was just 42-to-1. Annual pay was
           $26,899 in 2003, up just 2.1% from 2002 according to the Bureau of
           Labor Statistics. The average large company CEO received
           compensation totaling $8.1 million in 2003, up 9.1% from the
           previous year.  The average worker took home $517 in their
           weekly paycheck in 2003; the average large company CEO took
           home $155,769 in their weekly pay.If the minimum wage had increased
           as quickly as CEO pay since 1990, it would today be $15.71 per hour,
           more than three times the current minimum wage of $5.15 an hour.
           http://tinyurl.com/5tc4t
           \_ Are you stupid? EVERYONE knows that the wealth gap is increasing
              disproportionally esp. in the US and everyone knows that the
              current Reagan-worshipping administration doesn't really give
              a damn. You don't need to spend 10 million dollars on formal
              inquiries to find out if Clinton had sex in the Whitehouse or
              not; it's just common knowledge.
              \_ Speaking of Clinton, the wage gap grew tremendously under
                 Clinton.
                 \- clinton didnt try to repeal the billionaire estate
                    preservation tax. however his pardon of marc rich does
                    give us an example of of the problems that can be avoided.
                 \_ Does it ever shrink?  Did it grow more under Clinton or
                    under Bush?
                    \_ i believe more under Clinton, but he had a booming
                       economy for 7+ years.
                       \_ As wages have DROPPED under bush, this whole point
                          has a definite apples-to-oranges feel.
                 \_ This is simply not true. The poorest quintile's share
                    of national income grew under Clinton. Unless you are
                    talking about something else, like the average ratio\
                    of CEO pay to worker pay. What are you talking about?
                    talking about something else, like the average ratio
                    of CEO pay to worker pay. What are you talking about?
                 \_ References please
                    \_ google for: wage gap under clinton. here's an example:
                        http://www.ncpa.org/pd/economy/pdeco/dec97nnn.html
                        \_ Here are much better statistics:
           http://www.bsos.umd.edu/socy/vanneman/socy441/trends/share1.html
                           Go look at the whole site. The top got richer,
                           but the poor did not get poorer. It was the middle
                           class that really took a hit under Clinton.
                           \_ That's an odd conclusion to reach from the data
                              there.
                              \_ In 1992, the bottom quintile took 4.2% of
                                 the national income. In 2000, they took
                                 4.3%. 4.3 is larger than 4.2, right?
                                 \_ I was talking about the "middle class ..
                                    took a hit" conclusion.  The quintiles
                                    moved, but the data are incomplete.  Did
                                    the second or fourth quintile grow?
                                    \_  http://csua.org/u/bm0
                                        The top quintile made a bunch more
                                        and the bottom stayed the same. It
                                        should be pretty easy to figure out
                                        who is left and what happened to them.
                                        \_ Look at the full data:
                                           http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/f03.html
                                           income increased for all levels
                                           through the clintotn years.  Bush
                                           takes office and the bottom gets
                                           taken, the middle slows and the
                                           top keeps rising.
              \_ I'm all for Bush, Cheney and Co having wild & raunchy
                 bestiality S&M orgies 24/7 in the White House if it will
                 make my stock portfolio go back up to 2000 levels when
                 Clinton was getting in trouble for getting his cock sucked.
                 \_ Well you could have done *better* than 2000 had you gotten
                    in/out of Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and Enron. A lot of
                    Texans didn't get in/out of the tech era, but now they're
                    pretty happy with the current administration. Sucks 2 b u.
                        \_ I did fine actually, just no longer rich on paper.
2005/4/5-6 [Computer/Companies/Apple] UID:37076 Activity:nil 66%like:37093
4/5     When will Apple release the Tiger?
        \_ Will the Tiger pray the Longhorn?  Tonight at eight on Discovery
           Channel.
2005/4/5-8 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:37077 Activity:low
4/5     interviewing for Google, any idea how they interview?
        heard it was unorthodox...thanks..
        \_ Just tell them you know the secret word that rhymes with orange
           and that you'll tell them if they hire you.
           \_ arrange.
           \_ door hinge
              \_ That's not the secret word, it's two words.
           \_ purple
           \_ p0rn-age
           \_ stonehenge
           \_ stonehenge, syringe
        \_ Not really.  You get the standard, all-day thing with lunch at
           the cafeteria, full of tech questions.  I've had more difficult
           interviews.  I've met both nicer and meaner people, both smarter
           and dumber people.  It's a place.  They're people.  Good luck!
        \_ grats on the interview, just be cool.
        \_ The tech interview was much easier than I expected.  I was warned
           for the 2nd ("personality") interview to "be enthusiastic".  I was
           myself and thus judged not Google-worthy.  (They told me "your
           technical skills are great, but you didn't seem excited enough")
           Of course if their recruiters are telling you how to behave and
           that's what they're checking for (enthusiasm, real or otherwise),
           that's a little silly, but *shrug*.  Do what they say if you really
           want the job.  The job market's getting better and something better
           came along so I'm glad it fell through.  --dbushong
           \_ All it takes is one or two unhappy people to really drag down
              a team.  Personality really does matter.  And generally people
              faking enthusasim are pretty spottable.  If you can fake it well
              you probably are enthusastic enough to not be a drag.  If you
              can't (or have a "I'm not going to be enthusastic" chip on
              your shoulder well, that's a warning sign.  Warning signs don't
              mean you are goign to be a bad employee but let's face it,
              Google can afford to lose a good person here and there in
              order to weed out the bad ones.
              \_ "enthusiasm".
              \_ This is ridiculously stupid.  Enthusiastic about what?  Do all
                 the google people jump around saying "whomp" and having
                 "teambuilding" activities?
                 \_ whomp whomp on the head!  whomp whomp on the head!
                 \_ That place is starting to sound weird. There was a /.
                    article about the "personal projects" that people are
                    allowed to work on, except the guy was saying it's
                    starting to be like you have to have a personal project
                    or else you won't look good, etc.
           \_ In the post-Google IPO world, I don't think they can afford
              to be as picky as they seem to think they can be. Is there
              really that much cachet associated with working there that
              hundreds of new hires will take under market wages and longer
              hours just to be there?
              \_ Yes.  And partly because they know Google is picky.
                 \_ Which doesn't explain aaron.
                    \_ aaron is blacklisted for improper not-happy vibes.
2005/4/5-8 [Recreation/Food/Alcohol, Recreation/Food] UID:37078 Activity:moderate
4/5     Any recommendations for an SF restaurant that can accomodate
        25-30, at $30-$40/person. Note: in my experience big dinners
        tend to come in 20-30% more expensive than smaller dinners
        [i.e. a $30/person rest comes in at $40 when you have
        20-30 people ordering glasses/bottles of wine or appetizers
        right and left, or taking advantage of a split check]. Tnx.
        \_ Check the Blue Plate or Chenery Park and ask if you can just rent
           the place.  They're very nice people.  -John
        \_ how about Jillian's, i'm sure enough alcohol can get you
           up to $30 per.
        \_ Just about any decent sized place in Chinatown will do this.
           The Slanted Door has a room for 24. Might be a bit out
           of your price range. -ausman
        \_ Check out Delancey Street Restaurant (600 Embarcadero at Brannan)
           it's pretty good, plus they do cheap ($4) valet parking if people
           are coming by car. -dans
           \- Hmm, this may be a good option on a non-baseball night.
              I guess I'll havve to stop in and try the food. ok tnx.
              I guess I'll havve to stop in and try the food.
              SD, BP, CP are all more expensive. this is just for a dinner
              with friends so i dont really want to or feel the need to
              rent an exclusive venue. i think metreon probably has to much
              of a rifraff factor on a fri/sat night. ok tnx.
              \_ What is wrong with Chinatown? Do I need to give you
                 a specific restaurant name? -ausman
           \_ I like the food there a lot, and it's for a good cause.
        \_ one of my favorites while I lived in the Bay Area was Eos.
2005/4/5-8 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:37079 Activity:nil
4/5     Does anyone know how Linux decides which interface to use when there
        are multiple on the same subnet?  The routing code is pretty hairy
        and I don't want to have to go through it all right now.  It seems
        clear that routing lookup are cached, so as long as the cache entry
        is present the interface is fixed for a src/dst pair.  But I haven't
        waded through the slow lookup yet. --jwm
        \_ I think it uses the first one that matches. run route -n
           Why would you haev multiple interfaces on the same subnet?
           \_ Short answer customers make strange choices. Basically
              I'm working with a device that has an interface that does
              work, and one for admin.  sometimes they end up on the same
              subnet.  But I can also see it being used to increase BW for
              something like iSCSI.
2017/11/19 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
11/19   
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:April:05 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>