Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:October:17 Monday <Sunday, Tuesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2005/10/17-19 [Transportation/Car] UID:40131 Activity:low
10/16   Which insurance policy/company would you recommend for a first-time
        car driver in his late 20s (just got the license).
        \_ Looking to save money, or looking for customer service, or what?
           It'll cost a buttload any way you go.  Don't register an
           expensive car, for sure.
           \_ Looking to save money of course. Should I be looking to good
              customer service too? I'll drive a 5-year old Taurus.
        \_ When my wife was in a similar situation (1st-time driver in her
           mid-twenties), she found an insurance agent who was willing to
           give her credit for 10 years of (nonexistent) driving experience
           back in the mother country, which lowered her rate somewhat.  Both
           my wife and the agent are <ethnic>, and that made the deal possible.
           YMMV, of course.
           \_ hope your wife and agent didn't make other deals
              \_ Isn't impugning another person's honor a sorryable offense
                 now?  Politburo?
                 \_ What honor?
        \_ if you had your permit for those years, allstate gives you credit
           for them. -dwc
2005/10/17-19 [Recreation/Music] UID:40132 Activity:nil
10/16   "Pi" the music video!
        http://keithschofield.com/pi/std.html
2005/10/17-19 [Uncategorized] UID:40134 Activity:nil
10/16   The new version of Ubuntu is out, has anyone tried it yet?
        \_ I'm not talking to you anymore jrleek. I've lost respect for you.
        \_ FreeBSD6.0 RC is out too.
2005/10/17-19 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll, Computer/SW] UID:40135 Activity:low
10/16   Poll for those who purchase home(s), poor students need not respond:
        the housing boom has been:
        An American Dream Come True:
        An American Dream Broken:
        \_ Yermom is so fat, when she sits around the house, she sits AROUND
           the house!
           \_ This is your first and last warning.  If I continue to see
              character assasinations against any mom of any member of the
              CSUA, myself included, I will sorry your account.  If I
              continue to see defamation against mymom, I will file for a
              restraining order against you that bars you from your behavior.
              No friends that you think you have with moms will be able to
              help you.  If you wish to debate the virtues of mymom or yermom,
              do so as an adult.   - !amckee
              \- there is a clear precedent in english common LAW that states
                 that all citizens shall have the right to post YERMOM jokes
                 to the motd [long excerpt from english common law].  your
                 censorship is much like NAZI persecution of JEWS, and can
                 be summed up by the following obscure latin phrase: [obscure
                 latin PHRASE]
                 \- dont make the pburo MANDAMUS your ass.
2005/10/17-19 [Industry/Jobs] UID:40136 Activity:low
10/17   What's the purpose of HR in a company?  Is it to bring in the best
        people at the lowest possible cost?  Just curious cuz I'm going
        through the process...
        \_ there's a great deal of employer/employee relationship things
           that HR in a company normally takes care of.  Quite a bit more
           than could easily be covered in a motd post.
           \_ In terms of job offers, however, is that essentially what their
              "duty" is (to get someone to accept at the lowest price)?  Do
              they somehow have incentive to get someone to accept at lower
              salary ranges?
              \_ Probably not.  Acutally lots of HR people don't have much
                 leeway on hiring price.  HR does a lot more than just hire
                 people.  Benefits, payroll, handling employee conflicts,
                 workers comp, dealing with unions, etc etc.  There's a lot
                 of crap that falls into HRs laps.
                 \_ crap is an understatement.
        \_ why are you asking, anyway?
           \_ I'm curious, that's all.  Plus it doesn't hurt to know how the
              salary process works.
        \_ "It depends".  Ranges from "tell this guy I am hiring about legal
           stuff and arrange contract/$$$" to actually hiring, dealing with
           trainings and evaluations, firing, management development, etc.
           Varies enormously by company.  Usually non-management HR is
           staffed by planks (general observation.)  -John
        \_ The cruel truth is that HR's main role is to prevent the Company
           from being sued.  ie., all the employee happy relations programs,
           mediations, comp/benefit structures, compliance, training, etc.
           That's my understanding.  --chris (who was in HR and recruiting)
2005/10/17-19 [Recreation/Media] UID:40137 Activity:moderate
10/17   Anyone buy Firefly?  I think people will start wanting to bring
        back Firefly after Serenity.
        \_ There is no chance of Firefly getting another network season.
        \_ Serenity's only made $22M
        \_ I bought it.  The first episode (two-hour pilot) was long and kind
           of boring.  I'm seeing the movie tonight for my b-day -- hope it's
           better.
           \_ First two episodes are very dull. The third one is when things
              start to click in terms of story, pacing, actors getting into
              their characters, etc.
           \_ Well, I just got back, and while the theatre had only four
              other people (and two left half way), the movie was an 8/10
              in my book.  Not bad, but the Zephram Cochrane movie was better.
              \_ I hate time travel movies like that. It's like going back in
                 time and forcing your dad to nail yermom at "precisely the
                 right moment" to insure your birth. (Potential porn plot!
                 Added twist: timing off, guy turns to gal! But the threesome
                 continues.)
        \_ I thought Serenity was horrible, there's no way it will spark
           interest in Firefly.  In fact, now I'm certain I'll never watch
           the show after seeing how bad the movie is.  My date hated it
           too.  It's definitely a cult-film and series.  A few things that
           made me want to leave half-way through...
           - Really bad acting
           - Really bad lines (script)
           - Bad action scenes
           - Bad, TV-like cinematography
           - Weak, boring villian
           - Bad, TV-like special effects
           - Weak story (something about [spoiler removed])
           + Girl who knew karate, fight scenes with her
           \_ Uhm, sometimes we see movies that just aren't our thing.  I
              didn't see the TV shows so I'm not a cultist but I really liked
              the movie and so did my date.  Some of the things you say were
              bad about it are the things we liked most.  It just wasn't your
              taste, I guess.
           \_ Interesting.  If you replace "bad", "boring", and "weak"
              in your post with "not cliche", you have my take on it.  The one
              thing you liked was the most mainstream element of the movie,
              I'd say.  Oh, except the special effects, which were indeed
              mediocre... but the movie cost $22M, not hundreds of millions.
2005/10/17-19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:40138 Activity:high
10/17   http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Meet-the-Press-Condi-Iraq-war-9-11.wmv
        http://movies.crooksandliars.com/Meet-the-Press-Condi-Iraq-war-9-11.mov
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9684807
        What I got from Condi's interview:
        (1) al Qaeda attacked us
        (2) Don't get al Qaeda; Saddam is the bigger priority
        (3) Get Saddam while he's small
        (4) Build a democracy in Iraq to weaken dictator-led countries (and
            especially to enable a democratic-revolution in Iran) -- since
            democracies are more predictable / easier to deal with on WMDs
        (5) Don't tell the American people this is the strategy.  Instead,
            focus on Iraqi WMDs to win required political support.
        This may or may not be the smoking gun, but it sure as hell tells me
        what Condi thought.
        \_ Don't forget (6) PROFIT!!!!!
           \_ nah, I don't believe that -op
              \_ Erm, we've seen the military-industrial complex at work
                 before our eyes, and you just "don't believe it"?  You
                 think this was all just international dick waving?
                 \_ I believe the administration did what it thought would
                    protect America, even though both the overall strategy and
                    \_ So did Joe McCarthy.  You've read 7 Days in May?  So
                       does General Scott.  That's no excuse.  -John
                       \_ It /is/ no excuse, and I'm in complete agreement with
                          you.  I was just answering the guy who was saying
                          that profit was a big motive. -op
                          \_ Why else give extended no-bid contracts?  Why
                             short change on things like armor?  Non-rotted
                             food?  Why avoid at all costs anything resembling
                             the Truman commission?  Or are these things just
                             afterthoughts in your opinion?  The people in this
                             administration have been in the _business_ of war
                             for generations.
                             \_ I'm mostly just playing devil's advocate here,
                                but wouldn't good, expensive food and armor
                                have brought even more profits to the
                                military suppliers, especially in light
                                of the no-bid contracts?  It seems to me that
                                whether this war was for preventing terrorism,
                                spreading democracy, bringing peace to the
                                middle east, maximizing American corporate
                                profits, or spreading some kind of American
                                Empire, it ends up looking like a clusterfuck
                                run by morons.
                                \_ No because if the contracts weren't no-bid
                                   the people fullfilling them would have to
                                   actually deliver decent services for their
                                   money, which would leave more money for
                                   things like armor and edible food.
                                   \_ Indeed.  look up Bunnatine Greenhouse,
                                   \_ Indeed.  look up Bunnington Greenhouse,
                                      formerly in charge of army (?)
                                      procurement.  The no-bid contracts that
                                      came across her desk were for 5 year
                                      terms.  no-bids are rarely for more than
                                      1 year, because they're meant to be stop-
                                      gaps.  she also says that the pentagon
                                      stopped asking for cost-justification
                                      reports, which are the only teeth the
                                      government has to keep an eye on
                                      cost-plus contracts
                             \_ The desire to protect America came first.  The
                                clusterfuck and the war-profiteering came after
                                we invaded.  Sure there were people calculating
                                how to make big bux prior to the invasion,
                                but I think protecting America came first
                                before big bux when Dubya decided to invade.
                                -op
                                we invaded. -op
                                how to make big bux to capitalize on the
                                coming war, but I think protecting America
                                came first before big bux when Dubya decided
                                to invade. -op
                                \_ I think you're naive.  I think if that was
                                   their first thought, the military would have
                                   had an actual war plan.  They were pie-eyed.
                                   They had planned how they would restructure
                                   the economy, but not how they would keep
                                   the peace.  These are crooks.
                                   \_ Don't forget that the miltary DID have
                                      very detailed plans of what would happen
                                      in various cases, and those who spoke
                                      out about insufficient forces were
                                      sacked by Donald Rumsfeld.  We KNEW
                                      we getting into a mess and did it
                                      anyway.  Future generations will ask
                                      \_ Exactly my point.  In chaos it's
                                         easy to "lose" money (read "steal).
                                         They haven't changed their approach
                                         because they're perfectly happy with
                                         the situation.  So a few soldiers
                                         die... big whup.  So a few civilians
                                         die... Dude, they're, like, brown.
                                      why we didn't do anything about the
                                      neocons in the same naive tones that
                                      schoolchildren today ask about the
                                      Nazi party rise to power.
                                   \_ If you took a poll of informed observers,
                                      I think the majority would agree with me,
                                      and the majority would also say that
                                      while you have a noble interest in
                                      finding out the truth, you're
                                      overstating.  I agree with the pie-eyed
                                      characterization though, and I think the
                                      lack of a realistic post-war rebuilding
                                      plan was Rummy's mistake, since there
                                      were plenty of generals who questioned
                                      why we didn't have more troops for that
                                      phase. -op
                                      \_ CNN already took this poll, and
                                         a plurailty of Americans believe
                                         you are wrong.
                                         \_ You fail on two points:
                                            (1) CNN did not ask Americans
                                                "Was the war to protect America
                                                or 'for profit'?", which is
                                                what we're arguing about.
                                            \_ You're setting up a false
                                               dichotomy.  The question
                                               "is this war making us safer"
                                               has been polled for the duration.
                                               the yes side has steadily gone
                                               down as people have realized it
                                               will drag on forever, and is
                                               against the wrong "enemy".
                                               \_ Apparently you forgot the
                                                  original topic.  The original
                                                  topic was "for profit" vs.
                                                  "protecting America".
                                                  You - forgot - the -
                                                  original - topic.  Follow
                                                  the precise thread of
                                                  conversation.  I'll show you:
                                                  CNN already took this poll ..
                                                  If you took a poll ...
                                                  I think you're naive ...
                                                  The desire to protect ...
                                                  [all the way to:]
                                                  ... (6) PROFIT!!!!!
                                                  -- And there you have it.
                                                  Trust me:  I am completely
                                                  aware that more Americans
                                                  than not feel that the war
                                                  may not have been worth it,
                                                  nor made us safer.
                                                  \_ Seriously, discussing
                                                     this with you is like
                                                     discussing ID with a
                                                     true believer.  I'll
                                                     dub this the "incompetent
                                                     intent" theory on the
                                                     Bush presidency.
                                            (2) I said "informed observers".
                                      \_ Then why haven't they made any moves
                                         to FIX their mistakes.  I can only
                                         conclude that they're happy with the
                                         situation.  Stay the course, beeyotch
                                         \_ We're not sending (a lot) more
                                            troops because the generals are
                                            saying sending (a lot) more troops
                                            would make things worse.
                                            \_ sourceP
                                      overstating. -op
                                               \_ #t
                                               \_ just google for
                                                  "send more troops iraq worse"
                                                  \_ Fuck off.
                                                     \_ what's the problem?
                                                        most informed observers
                                                        already know this, and
                                                        the search works.
                                      \_ It's hard sometimes to figure out
                                         where Bush admin desire for
                                         "crusades" in the middle east to
                                         install compliant, pro-Western
                                         "democracies" ends and where the
                                         desire to shovel as much $$$ to
                                         Halliburton, et al begins.  It's all
                                         a dangerous mix of corruption &
                                         incompetence.
                    execution were bungled.  Jury's still out on whether "Bush
                    lied" or not, but at least I now know what Condi thinks
                    about the reason for toppling Saddam.
                    \_ We toppled Iran in 1950s and it didn't get us anywhere.
                       Don't you see the pattern now?  all the "enemy" of the
                       middle east *HAPPENS* to be those country whose oil
                       is not in few monarch's hand.  Get real.
                       \_ We kicked Saddam out of Kuwait because Kuwait had
                          oil.  We haven't done much about Rwanda and Darfur.
                          I'm keeping this discussion very real.
                          Is it oil "for profit" as point 6, or is it oil
                          for "protecting America", like I've said? -op
                          \_ The oil "for profit" explanation doesn't make
                             much sense to me, at least to the extent
                             that it's just oil company profits that they're
                             concerned about.  Tightening oil supply leads
                             to high prices, which puts money in the pockets
                             of oilmen.  I.e., I agree with you. -!pp
                                \_ Actually the ultimate goal is to control
                                   this area of the world so that when oil
                                   is no longer a fungible commodity, the
                                   US economy still has a supply.  It's
                                   unlikely to work since people in the region
                                   hate us with a passion.
                                   \_ You have the right idea, but not quite.
                                      The ultimate goal is to protect America.
                                      Re oil, the target is to have a
                                      predictable and significant share of oil
                                      supplies, in such a way that oil-
                                      producing countries can't easily
                                      blackmail us or turn off the spigot in
                                      times of war, and we know how much is
                                      left.  If this target can be maintained
                                      (and it has been for a couple decades),
                                      then the availability of oil should
                                      then the availabitily of oil should
                                      decrease gradually and predictably.
                                      Market forces will encourage the steady
                                      development of alternative and more
                                      energy-efficient technologies.  Key words
                                      efficient-energy technologies.  Key words
                                      are "gradual" and "predictable".
                                      -liberal/moderate
        \_ posting 3 url's is reason enough to change the motd into a
           bbs forum.  cutting and pasting these links... gawd!! - napoleon
2005/10/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:40139 Activity:nil
10/17   "Iraqi election officials said today that they were investigating ...
        vote totals in 12 Shiite and Kurdish provinces, where as many as 99
        percent of the voters were reported to have cast ballots in favor
        of Iraq's new constitution"
        \_ We'll just call those the "red provinces".  At least the elections
           in Iraq don't seem to be more crooked than ours.
2005/10/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:40140 Activity:nil
10/17   Bush refuses to discuss CIA leak probe. Go Bush!
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051017/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/cia_leak_investigation
        \_ "I refuse to comment on any investigation that might make my
            administration look like it's full of crooks, liars and traitors"
2005/10/17-19 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:40141 Activity:nil
10/17   Hi motd and Politburo:
        Is it okay to post on http://ucb.org.csua all e-mail exchanges between psb
        and cc'd to {politburo,csua}@csua.berkeley.edu?
        I am specifically excluding private messages sent between psb and
        individual Politburo members with no cc's to the above e-mail
        addresses.  Thanks.
        If you want me to e-mail politburo@csua.berkeley.edu with this request
        instead of asking on motd, please go ahead and post that.
        \- BTW, it's ok with me.  BTW, is this a "sorryable" offense now?
           Is http://ucb.org.csua moderated now? --psb
2005/10/17-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:40146 Activity:kinda low
10/17   Great new graph, showing Bush's approval rating:
        http://www.yeeguy.com/freefall
        \_ Ok, just curious... let's say his approval rating fell to zero.
           So what?
           \_ chance of people rebel against him within his own party
              would increase and thus, chance of Bush successfully push
              his agenda will drastically decreased :p
              \_ possibly true, but a closer look shows that his approval
                 among his Republican base remains at 84%.  These people
                 are innured to facts.
                \_ The lower the approval goes, the crazier the stuff they
                   will try to do/get away with.  Admitting fault and changing
                   are less likely.
                   \_ Oh, yeah?  What happened to Bush's social security
                      agenda?  He's playing defense.  Thanks to Bush being
                      put on the defensive there might actually be a glimmer of
                      hope for social security.  Neutering that fucker will
                      have real, notocable positive effects on peoples lives,
                      have real, noticeable positive effects on peoples lives,
                      and his present popularity disaster is doing exactly
                      that.  Why do you think he nominated Meiers and
                      Robertson instead of some drooling fascist fuck like
                      Roberts instead of some drooling fascist fuck like
                      his base wanted?
                      \_ That's Roberts, not Robertson. And he nominated both
                         \_ That's what I love about MOTD.  We never let the
                            ignorance of basic facts stop us from spouting
                            from our soapbox.  BTW, isn't it Miers?
                         of them on the strength of his administration over
                         the GOP. I haven't heard one Republican senator say
                         they would vote no. They mumble about doubts and
                         concerns, but in the end they will nearly all swallow
                         their bile and vote "aye."
                      \_ I'm glad there will be notocable positive effects.
              \_ Bush has indeed changed somewhat from his 1st term.  After
                 9/11, he basically sought to unilaterally do everything,
                 regardless of public opinion.  Since the 2004 re-election,
                 he at least seems to have moderated himself
2005/10/17-18 [Uncategorized] UID:40147 Activity:nil 80%like:40148
10/17   Has anyone been in Reno around thanksgiving holidays? Is it normally
        snowing during that time?
2017/09/25 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/25    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:October:17 Monday <Sunday, Tuesday>