Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:June:11 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2005/6/11-13 [Health, Health/Eyes] UID:38084 Activity:low
6/10    I found this quite moving [E'ist Obit]:
        \_ passive acceptance to racial prejudice.  It is a role model
           which we want minorities to follow.
        \_ passive accpetance to racial prejudice, a model which we should
           encourage minorties to follow.
2005/6/11-13 [Transportation/Car, Transportation/Car/RoadHogs] UID:38085 Activity:low
6/10    Who says the French can't make great cars?
        (Transforming, Dancing Citroen)
        \_ Aside from this one (laser guns and transforming robot capability
           are optional equipment) they make excellent cars, well on par with
           anything you can get from a Jap or US mfgr--except for sports cars,
           trucks or big sedans.  -John
        \_ That's Gaullish genius all right.
           \_ Gaulish.  Gaullish would have been state-funded, really big,
              shiny, fast and super duper expensive.  That said, aside from
              sports cars, pickups/SUVs and large Cadillac-style limousines,
              French cars are as solid as anything on the market.  -John
        \_ Why does some fuckwit keep nuking my comment about French cars
           actually being pretty good?  Got riceboy issues?  -John
           \_ Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys!
           \_ No, it's freedom fries issues.
2005/6/11-13 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:38086 Activity:high
        I happen to think AI is not playing a very intelligent game, lately.
          -- ilyas
        \_ Wow, that goes even beyond my tolerance of holding the US to
           a higher standard.  If lunatics like this are taken to represent
           legitimate grievances, Joe Shmo will never take these seriously
           in the least.  -John
           \_ Yow. Gitmo is bad news, AG was a disaster, but comparing that
              to Pinochet is strictly KPFA territory. Really, folks, yelling
              Nazi at people is not a constructive approach. --erikred
              \_ Reread it. No one was compared to Pinochet. It was simply
                 stated that International Law could be brought to bear,
                 similar to what happened to Pinochet.
                 \_ Read and re-read. By placing Pinochet's name in that
                    context, the author is inviting comparison. Either it's
                    an example of poor editing technique, or it's deliberate.
                    \_ You are just reading into it what you want to see.
                       It is just the most high profile example of what
                       can happen to the powerful when subject to
                       International Law. If they had mentioned Kissinger's
                       midnight flight from Spain would you claim they
                       were comparing Rumsfeld to Kissinger?
                       \_ 'The apparent high-level architects of torture
                           should think twice before planning their next
                           vacation to places like Acapulco or the French
                           Riviera because they may find themselves under
                           arrest as Augusto Pinochet famously did in London
                           in 1998.'
                          You read that without immediately drawing a link
                          between what Pinochet did and what has happened in
                          Gitmo and AG? (And OT: Kissinger had/has panache;
                          Rumsfeld's running on sheer gall.)
        \_ and you think AI was playing very intelligent game when it
           critizing other countries?
           \_ AI is like the ACLU--a bit "out there", but fills a valuable
              function, as many of these groups do, drawing attention to
              wrongdoings.  There are a lot of countries that deserve harsh
              criticisms, including the US  However, there's also the idea
              of proportionality--while a Gitmo is horrible for a nation that
              should be a good example worldwide, bearing down almost solely
              on the US while almost completely disregarding all the far worse
              shit going on around the world (except for an "oh, yeah, there's
              Nepal and Darfur, but it's still kind of your fault for letting
              it happen") is just mad.  -John
              \_ Also, ACLU gets bonus points for noting that prisoner abuse
                 in US prisons is a huge humanitarian problem, and as such
                 prisoner abuse is, sadly, nothing new for the US. -- ilyas
              \_ my biggest problem with AI is that their selection on which
                 country to pick on seems to be not-so-randomn.  Noticably,
                 lack of critism of those nations who are US allies, such as
                 Turkey and Saudi Arabia. I've always assumed
                 it is a PR arm of US or UK in the past.
                    \_ that is my point.  couple pages on the internet,
                       nothing more.  No voice of boycott / economic / arm
                       embargo or anything close to it.  I just wondering
                       why China gets all the blame.
                       \_ Wow. AI can embargo weapons? They are
                          far more powerful than I realized.
        \_ This somehow suprises you? AI has always been on the lunatic
           fringe along with PETA.
           \_ Bzzt. See John's comment above. Also, AI has been more
              reluctant to engage in hyperbole and guerilla PR than PETA.
              Cf. PBS vs. KPFA.
        \_ Since everything they put in that report was true, it is hard
           for me to figure out why you are so opposed to it. -ausman
           \_ Do you really not see?  Let's imagine a hypothetical human rights
              body compiling a report on World War II, and mostly talking
              about Hiroshima, and the Dresden fire bombing.  Everything they
              said was true... -- ilyas
              \_ You are confused about the difference between Amnesty USA
                 and Amnesty International. Shouldn't the Amnesty sub-branch
                 of a country be most concerned with Human Rights in their
                 own country? The total Amnesty International report focuses
                 first on Darfur, then way down the list on Gitmo:
                 Would your hypothetical WWII human rights rights organization
                 be wrong to mention Dresden at all?
                 \_ Then they should either not make what looks like a mere
                    footnote out of supposed US responsibility for wrongs in
                    Nepal and Indonesia or be consistent and complete in their
                    criticism of perceived US inaction or wrongs committed
                    elsewhere.  -John
                 \_ If, as you say, the purpose of is
                    specifically the violations committed by the US government,
                    one has to ask why isn't a website devoted specifically
                    to governments that are actually a greater humanitarian
                    problem (NK, etc).  As far as I can see, the US is singled
                    out for a unique form of abuse -- the report pasted is just
                    the bashing of the US.  That there is a general report
                    which lists other countries does not explain the need for
                    the current website to exist.
                    \_ Are you being deliberately obtuse? Amnesty USA is
                       comprised of those members of Amnesty International
                       that reside in the USA. If there were enough North
                       Korean members to form a North Korea chapter,
                       I am sure they could have their own website, too.
                       \_ No, they would be found and executed by the NK gov.
                          Sheesh.  Welcome to reality.
                          \_ Your brain has been classified as: small.
                       \_ Ok.  The United States is a uniquely transparent,
                          self-examining society.  I suppose it does make it
                          easy to specifically bash them.  But this is, as an
                          old jewish proverb goes, looking for what is lost
                          under the lamppost (because that's where the light
                          is).  Also, where's Amnesty Europe?
                          \_ Stop trying to defend torture. There is really
                             no defence. And you will find all sorts of
                             national chapter websites, if you take the
                             trouble to look for them. I am sure you can
                             use Google all on your own.
                             \_ You see, people often accuse Bush supporters of
                                the mentality of 'if you are not with us, you
                                are with the terrorists.'  Curiously, Amnesty
                                supporters seem to have the mentality 'if you
                                criticize Amnesty, you are defending torture!'
                                Give me a break.  This is a red herring.
                                  -- ilyas
                                \_ No, you were critizing AI USA for attacking
                                   the US human rights record. There is really
                                   only one way to read that. No red herring
                                   at all. The claim that there is no AI
                                   Europe is the Red Herring. Europe is not
                                   even a country. Even a five minute search
                                   using Google turned up AI France, Germany,
                                   UK, Israel, Turkey, The Netherlands, Norway,
                                   India, Finland, Norway, NZ and Australia.
                                   \_ No, I am not criticising AI USA for the
                                      act of criticism itself, but for lack of
                                      scale and implied moral relativism.
                                      'Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes?'  If
                                      holding the US to a higher standard is
                                      important, then holding Amnesty to an even
                                      higher standard is doubly important.
                                      important, then holding Amnesty to an
                                      even higher standard is doubly important.
                                        -- ilyas
                                      \_ And exactly how many tank divisions
                                         does Amnesty International have?
                                         \_ How many tanks does the Catholic
                                            Church have?  Do you think they are
                                            a powerless organization too?  You
                                            have to watch a lot more people
                                            than just those with tanks.  This
                                            is another red herring.  In some
                                            sense, though, there is a kind of
                                            karma to these orgs.  If they get
                                            too shrill, people stop paying
                                            attention to them. -- ilyas
                                            \_ It is amusing that you think
                                               that Amnesty International is
                                               more powerful than the Pentagon.
                                            \_ Your knowledge of Soviet
                                               history is lacking.
                                               \_ I suppose the fact that
                                                  Djugashvili said it makes it
                                                  a RED herring. -- ilyas
2005/6/11-13 [Computer/SW/Virus] UID:38087 Activity:kinda low
6/10    If I buy "Norton Internet Security 2005", is it possible (easy) to
        install "Norton Antivirus 2005" ONLY, and not install any of the
        other applications included with "Norton Internet Security 2005"?
        \_ AFAIK, no.
        \_ If you tell me what you are trying to accomplish, I will gladly
           give you a list of compelling reasons to not bother with Norton
           and try to help you find better ways of doing it.  -John
           \_ I want to install NAV on a couple WinXP computers. Fry's has
              a rebate deal on 3-user-license NIS, making it cheaper than
              downloading a 3-user NAV from Symantec. All I want is NAV.
              I'm wondering if I can install NAV only and not install
              all the other software in NIS.
              \_ I don't believe so--at least not without a whole bunch of
                 random NIS-related shit (even though you may not get the
                 actual functionality.)  May I recommend something that is a
                 bit less ugly and hoggish, like Kaspersky?  Or if you're on
                 a budget,  -John
                 \_ Thanks Kaspersky looks nice. Do you find it as successful
                    as NAV? Does it have the same level or protection, like
                    for example when a user attempts to run/open a file that
                    is infected?
                    \_ Yes, and it has a nice loud screeching noise when
                       it finds something.  It's much less of a resource hog
                       than NAV, and several colleagues and I have a strong
                       suspicion that some of the Kaspersky boys have better
                       contacts in the virus writing community than they let
                       on (usually very quick to release new patterns.)  -John
                        \_ Do you think that the guys with close contacts
                           with the virus writing comminuty still have a
                           strong conviction to the anti-virus work, seems
                           like they could install the ultimate backdoor..
                           \_ I think they're making too much money being
                              legit.  Note I didn't say they _were_ the guys
                              writing the viruses.  There are a lot of really
                              hardcore security pros who could be up to no
                              good, but aren't because they have good jobs and
                              a life, and parlaying their knowledge into $$$
                              and getting away with it would be too complex.
                              Think about it--any SW vendor could implant
                              gnarly trojans, but they don't, because they (a)
                              have better opportunities being legit, and (b)
                              consist of more than a few evil programmers.
                              If you're interested, I can give you a copy of
                              rona.a (the Israeli trojan, implanted in 4 firms)
                              that you can unleash in a vmware session to see
                              what kinds of nastiness are possible.  You might
                              also check the dailydave mailing list, or read
                              "stealing the network" for some plausible evil
                              stuff.  Note that many people in itsec know
                              someone who knows someone in the "black hat"
                              community--that doesn't mean they're going to
                              try and take over the world.  -John
                              \_ Wow, great answer. Thanks! -op
                     \_ What do you think of Grisoft?
                        \_ Not heard of it, but hey, it's free, why ask me?
                           Give it a try :)  -John
              \_ how about AVG?
2005/6/11-13 [Computer/Companies/Ebay, Reference/Law/Court] UID:38088 Activity:nil
6/10    For the fellow who bought the bad ram a week or two ago and was
        bitching or moaning about how it had an "as is" disclaimer
        on it buried somewhere on the product description on ebay,
        you can still take the guy to court on the basis that the
        disclaimer was not conspicious.
        \_ Just contact EBay complaint resolution service. Much cheaper
           than a lawsuit and just as likely to get you satisfaction.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:June:11 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>