Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:December:07 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2005/12/7-9 [Uncategorized] UID:40891 Activity:nil
12/7    Attention. The new soda machine has a new hidden feature. The OS
        keeps track of /etc/motd.public edits. Welcome to the new soda.
        \_ details?
           \_ trolled :P
              \_ not really; that was more akin to "proof?" -pp
2005/12/7 [Uncategorized] UID:40892 Activity:nil 70%like:40885
12/6    Click on "Watch The TV Ad" on the bottom left corner:
        http://www.honda.co.uk/impossibledream/window.html
        - direct: http://84.40.3.165
        \_ Is that guy anyone I should recognize?
        Also a different commercial on diesels, click on "See the Film":
        http://www.honda.co.uk/change
        - direct: http://www.btaa.co.uk/winners2005/movs/HondaDiesel_Grr.mov
        \_ the honda.co.uk website is cool. lots of bells and whistles.
2005/12/7 [Transportation/Airplane, Reference/Military] UID:40893 Activity:nil
12/7    Rat brain cells learn to fly a F-22:
        http://news.softpedia.com/news/Rats-Make-Good-F-22-Pilots-14299.shtml
2005/12/7-9 [Recreation/Humor] UID:40894 Activity:low Cat_by:auto
12/7    Definitive Guide to Gansta Combat:
        http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=414704&page=1
        \_ So, umm, the joke is that they are black?  Gee that's funny.
           \_ Um no. The joke is that they have no idea how to properly
              handle a gun. Just like most "urban youth."
           \_ You're a retard.
        \_ Very funny.  -John
2005/12/7-9 [Recreation/Humor] UID:40895 Activity:nil Cat_by:auto
12/7    Big brains means small balls (at least in bats):
        http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,17490140-13762,00.html
        \_ Is this why all male porn stars are so well-hung?
2005/12/7-9 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:40896 Activity:kinda low
12/7    Thanks for all the replies on what gifts to bring back to
        Taiwan.  I now hasve a better idea of what to bring for my aunts
        and uncles.  But what about cousins in their 20s.  Are there any
        electronic gadgets, apparel, etc.  that would be good gift ideas?
        Do people in Taiwan use iPods?  Are they more expensive in Taiwan?
        \_ Bring back nice traditional wife from rural China since most
           Taiwanese women have Westernized and modernized, meaning they
           don't cook, they don't clean, and they bitch all day.
           \_ You mean Taiwanese women are more like Hong Kong women now?
              \_ No, more like, both HK and Taiwanese women are mostly
                 Westernized so they're as bitchy as modern American
                 women. Whatever happened to the good 'ol traditional
                 women we saw from TV shows in the 60s like Bewitched and
                 I Dream of Jennie? Are they extinct? -fuck modernization
                            \_ That's "Jeannie", you cretin.
                 \_ Yes, but all sex must be scheduled in advance and only the
                    missionary position is allowed until the second child, then
                    you will be refused sex until someone dies.
                    \_ is this in reference to the 60s women, modern
                       Western women, or Westernized Asian women?
           \_ Is it just Taipei or is that true for the whole isle?
        \_ Young people in Hong Kong love Timberland boots, because they are
           very expensive over there.  Don't know about Taiwan.
           \_ haaa?  that was N years ago i think.
              \_ Oh, my sister told me this 7yrs ago.  I'm so outdated.
        \_ clothes from Polo/nautica/Gap.
2005/12/7-9 [Uncategorized] UID:40897 Activity:nil
12/7    http://www.livejournal.com/users/greentroll - zartan
        \_ Neat pictures. Any way to find out what fuck he's written for the
        \_ Neat pictures. Any way to find out what he's written for the
           few of us who can't read Russian?
           \_ All I know is he's Russian and lives in Korea.
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:40898 Activity:low
12/7    After I start a background job from tcsh in an xterm, I try to exit
        the shell.  But it stays around until the background job exits.  Is
        there a way to tell the shell not to wait for the background job to
        finish?  Thx.
        \_ Yes.
           \_ How?
        \_ nohup?
        \_ you might need to redirect to /dev/null also.
           \_ It still doesn't work.  What I do is:
              1. ssh into a Linux host.  My shell is tcsh.
              2. Type "nohup sleep 10 >& /dev/null &"
              3. Type "logout"
              The session doesn't close until "sleep" terminates.  I also tried
              /usr/bin/nohup and /bin/sleep, but got the same result.
              /usr/bin/nohup and /bin/sleep, but got the same result.  --- OP
              \_ maybe your tcsh has some customization that makes it wait.
                 check the startup files. the default tcsh behavior is to
                 disown jobs started with & upon exit. either that, or your
                 tcsh is broken.
                 \_ More info: I just found that this problem only happens if
                    I ssh into the host.  It doesn't if I rsh/rlogin/telnet
                    into the host.  --- OP
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/SW/Mail, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:40899 Activity:nil
12/7    So what are the correct SMTP settings for soda now? I've been
        using port 465 + SSL + password authentication and it's stopped
        working since the reboot.
        \_ I just mailed myself using port 25 + SSL + password.
           \_ % telnet http://csua.berkeley.edu 25
              Trying 128.32.112.233...
              telnet: connect to address 128.32.112.233: Connection refused
              telnet: Unable to connect to remote host
              \_ I just did that too and got a connection.
              \_ many isp's block port 25.
        \_ if you figure this out, please let me know, because I can't do
           it neither.  I can only email to myself.
2005/12/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/HateGroups] UID:40900 Activity:nil
12/7    Feel good link of the day
        http://www.newsobserver.com/710/story/362297.html - danh
        \_ further proof that poverty, not race, is the root of many problems.
           \_ Saying "race is not a problem" is a bit simplistic.  Only wackos
              claim there are genetic reasons for things tied to race these
              days, but there is social dysfunction present pervasively in
              some racial segments that could lead one to accurately state
              that some problems are, indeed, due to "race"
              \_ Which would be, in turn, itself simplistic. Any serious
                 analysis of "race" specific issues needs to focus on
                 history, geography, and economics.
                 \_ Are you saying there's no such thing as bad cultures?
                    \_ Bad culture? Sure. Bad "race"? Fuhgeddaboutit.
              \_ That's because only wackos dare to make such politically
                 incorrect claims as genetic reasons these days.
        \_ all of my feel good links are NSFW
           \_ alt.sex.stories* is text-based.
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/Networking] UID:40901 Activity:low
12/7    802.11 (security) question. How do I instruct my laptop to
        connect to an AP with specific mac address? (they all have
        same SSID) I have the netgear PCMCIA wireless access card. My
        netgear utility shows all the access points, but because they
        all have the same SSID, I don't have control over which one it
        actually connect to. It always seem to connect to the trouble
        some AP, and I get connection problems.  Occasionally I'll be
        connected to the good AP, and my connections are fine (but
        sometimes in the middle of doing some stuff It'll reconnect
        back to the bad AP). I did not find a way to set my wireless
        to connect to specific mac address. This seems like a security
        problem. Someone can just setup a bogus AP with the same name
        and I have no way of telling my card not to connect to it.
        Thanks.
        \_ Short answer:  "yes, it's a problem."  The fact that 802.11b
           has, very simplistically explained, 2 "channels", one for overhead
           type stuff like joins/parts and the other for actual data (it
           sort of has to, otherwise you couldn't negotiate connections with
           new hosts easily) is at the root of the possibility of sniffing
           wifi auth traffic for key cracking purposes.  If there's a way
           to let you select an AP by MAC, I'd love to know it.  This is why
           you should treat _any_ wireless connection as open.  -JOhn
           you should treat _any_ wireless connection as open.  -John
           \- to OP: this is the tip of the iceberg. you might look at
              Wm Arbaugh's book or some of his WEEB pages, e.g.
              http://www.cs.umd.edu/~waa/wireless.html
           \_ You can do LEAP or EAP-TLS (if you want actual security)
              authentication to ensure you are connected to the correct AP. -aus
2005/12/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:40902 Activity:high
12/7    http://CNN.com:  "Air marshal kills man who made bomb threat"
        Oh oh, you know the guy probably wasn't a genuine terrorist if they
        lead with a line like that.  Just compare the lead to the other
        major web sites' (foxnews.com too) if you don't know what I'm
        talking about. -jctwu
        \_ You're kidding me, right?
        \_ You're kidding me, right? --scotsman
           \_ Did you check the other web sites yet?
           \_ Did you check the other web sites yet? -jctwu
              \_ Uh, yes.  Plus a news.google check.  If anything, fox's is
                 less descriptive of the actual circumstance than all the rest.
                 I think, perhaps, I don't know what exactly you're complaining
                 about.
                 about. --scotsman
                 \_ Re-read the original post.
                 \_ Re-read the original post. -jctwu
                    \_ Comparing CNN's leed to
                       http://news.google.com/?ncl=http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1517646/20051207/index.jhtml%3Fheadlines%3Dtrue&hl=en
                       http://tinyurl.com/79ebc (news.google)
                       makes them look in pretty good company.  There seem
                       to me to be three classes of headlines here:
                       "Man made bomb threat, shot dead by air marshalls"
                       "Shots fired on Miami Plane"
                       "Air Marshalls kill crazy person"
                       CNN and many others are in the first group, International
                       feeds are in the second, and Fox and a number of other
                       papers are in the third.
                       papers are in the third. --scotsman
                       \_ Okay, here it is, for the largest web sites:
                          Man Shot Dead at Miami Airport (WP)
                          Air Marshal Shoots Passenger (NYT)
                          Marshal Shoots Suspect After Jet Lands in Miami (LAT)
                          Deadly Confrontation (MSNBC)
                          Air Marshals Kill Erratic Passenger (Fox)
                          Air marshal kills man who made bomb threat (CNN)
                          4 of 6 make factual statements
                          2 of 6 also make claims which assign responsibility
                          in addition to factual statements
                          \_ Uh.  You're insane.
                          in addition to factual statements -jctwu
                          \_ Uh.  You're insane. --scotsman
                             \_ Uh.  I don't think so.
                             \_ Uh.  I don't think so. -jctwu
                                \_ Okay, who do you think is being "assigned
                                   responsibility"?
                                   responsibility"? --scotsman
                                   \_ "It's the crazy dude's fault he got
                                      himself killed."
                                      himself killed. -jctwu
                                      \_ "Erratic" is accurate and does not
                                         imply blame.
                                         \_ Okay, that one I had trouble with.
                                            I'll revise that from 4 of 6
                                            and 2 of 6 to 4.5 of 6 and 1.5 of 6
                                             -jctwu
                                   \_ "Air Marshals Kill Erratic Passenger"
                                      assigns blaim to the air marshal, while
                                      assigns blame to the air marshal, while
                                      "Air marshal kills man who made bomb
                                      threat" assigns blaim to the passenger.
                                      \_ Uh..  No.  No it doesn't.
                                      threat" assigns blame to the passenger.
                                      \_ Uh..  No.  No it doesn't. --scotsman
                                      \_ As pp wrote, I had trouble with
                                         "erratic" since it can be interpreted
                                         as factual, so I'll give it a half
                                         point.
                                         point. -jctwu
                                      \_ I interpret them the completely
                                         opposite way. (And it's spelled
                                         "blame".)
                          \_ You missed this one:
                             http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10367598
                             "Air marshal guns down man at Miami airport"
                             \_ That's "Deadly Confrontation".  If you went
                                to all the sites earlier (now some of the
                                stories have moved/etc.), you would have seen
                                they're all the lead titles on the front-page
                                of those web sites.
                                of those web sites. -jctwu
        \_ Lessons learned: always do what armed law inforcement tells you
           to do.
           \_ ^law enforcement^*  (box cutters don't count as "armed")
              \_ The air marshals are law enforcement, and are armed.
                 \_ Someone doesn't know csh syntax. -pp
           \_ it didn't really help that Brazilian dude on the London subway
               -jctwu
              \_ It's not law enforcement's fault that the Brazillian
                 dude didn't look white. - magneto
        \_ "his wife tried to explain that he was mentally ill and had
            not taken his medication."
            \_ A female accomplice of a suicidal bomber can very well say the
               same thing in that situation.
               \_ I agree.  It's a tragedy if everything unfolded as Homeland
                  Security is claiming.  It's fucked up if HS or one of the
                  air marshals isn't telling it quite like it is.
                  air marshals isn't telling it quite like it is. -jctwu
                  \_ Okay, http://CNN.com is now /not/ reporting that crazy dude
                     reached into his bag, but that he approached the air
                     marshals aggressively after refusing to put his bag
                     down.  Yippee, 0-day newz p0wnz m3.
                     harhar, since then, the http://CNN.com story has changed
                     from the original, to no bomb found, to now his luggage
                     was exploded (implying there may have been a bomb but
                     we'll never know), and back to the original story that
                     he reached into his bag.
                     he reached into his bag. -jctwu
                     \_ Uh, dude.  Exploding the luggage in question is standard
                        procedure for suspected explosives.  Whether there
                        were or weren't explosive present isn't in doubt
                        afterward.  They know what they explode it with and
                        can tell whether other/more explosive material was
                        present.  Take a nap.
                        present.  Take a nap. --scotsman
                        \_ I know all that, "Take a nap"-dude.
                           In terms of spin, "No bomb found" has a much
                           different connotation than "luggage exploded" with
                           a cool picture of a bag exploding.
                           The former is also much more relevant.
                           The former is also much more relevant. -jctwu
                           \_ You're throwing a lot of epithets at CNN et al
                              over things that are endemic to the 24 hour
                              news cycle.  If you're just discovering this,
                              then more power to you, but seriously it's not
                              a big deal.  If you take issue with it, take note
                              that <random event> happened and read about it
                              the next morning. --scotsman
                              \_ Do you know what an epithet is? -jctwu
                                 \_ You're calling them out on their
                                    journalistic cred, and sounding
                                    like an idiot in doing so.  You've
                                    called them spinners and compared
                                    them unfavorably to Fox.  What
                                    would you like me to use instead
                                    of "epithet"? --scotsman
                                    \_ Just say I called them out on their
                                       journalistic cred, not "throwing a
                                       lot of epithets".  Congratulations
                                       you found the words. -jctwu
                                       \_ Because you're such the journalism
                                          critic...  I called them epithets
                                          because they don't rise to the
                                          level of "criticism" or "allegations"
                                          --scotsman
                                          \_ So, did you bother to look up
                                             the word yet? -jctwu
                                             \_ Jeff, I know what "epithet"
                                                means.  This ceased being
                                                amusing long ago.  Goodbye.
                                                --scotsman
                                                \_ Ben, why did you name me?
                                                   There's a reason why
                                                   I didn't sign.
                                                   This became an issue for me
                                                   the moment you said "Take
                                                   a nap", and then continued
                                                   with "throwing a lot of
                                                   epithets" and then "sounding
                                                   like an idiot".  I'm not
                                                   the one who started with
                                                   the personal attacks, and
                                                   I'm not the one who broke
                                                   the anonymity.
                                                   For those following this
                                                   thread, please note that
                                                   scotsman and I did not
                                                   sign our names until after
                                                   after the "Jeff, ..." post.
                                                   the "Ben, ..." post.
                                                   -jctwu
                                                   \- i personally also think
                                                      that is a peculiar use
                                                      of "epithet". --psb,
                                                      pater andron te theon te
                                                      \_ shrug, I'm sure
                                                         scotsman is a good guy
                                                         but we may have both
                                                         gotten a little
                                                         carried away, and
                                                         probably just wasted
                                                         our time more than
                                                         anything -jctwu
                                                         \- so no DUEL?
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/Domains] UID:40903 Activity:nil
12/7    Hi, I sold a domain name over a year ago. I asked the buyer to
        initiate the transfer process, TWICE. He said ok, he'll get on
        it. He hasn't done it yet, and I still own the domain name.
        The domain name is up for renewal. Can I take the domain name
        back since he never claimed it? Or should I just let it
        expire, in which case I'm sure that both I and the buyer will
        lose it? Thanks.
        \_ Mail him.  "It's expiring on this date.  If you haven't taken
           ownership of it by then it will revert.  I am not responsible for
           maintenance costs on your domain.  If you wish, I will renew, but
           you will own me renewal costs before I will hand it over."
           \_ Via notarized letter if you care enough.  -John
2005/12/7-9 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:40904 Activity:low
12/7    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051207/od_nm/germany_toothpaste_dc
        German shoplifter had a brush with the law.
        \_ Just goes to show you never can tell where your toothpaste has been.
           \_ He mistook those toothpaste for KY Jelly tubes.
        \_ "store detectives ...... forced him to hand over his booty." :-)
        \_ He nearly escaped by the skin of his teeth.
        \_ It says he's an Uzbek. Damn immigrants.
2005/12/7-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:40905 Activity:nil
12/7    Need a job? Are you tech saavy and have a passion for politics?
        The WHIG is hiring people to market ideas that retroactively
        justify the Iraq War, and ultimately sell the Iraq War to the
        public.
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051207/od_nm/bush_spin_dc
        \_ The war doesn't need retroactive justification, and can be
           fully vetted today.
           \_ Someone needs to reread their Orwell.
              \_ Are you kidding? He's hired!
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/SW/Database, Computer/SW/Security, Industry/Jobs] UID:40906 Activity:nil
12/7    We're looking for interns for a 3-5 month project helping us
        populate our security policy database for various windows applications.
        The work involves installing the application, using it for a while,
        determining the appropriate security policy, and entering it
        in to a database.  Work is 15+ hours a week (however much you want
        to work above min. 15 is fine), pays $12-$15 an hour, and can be
        done offsite from the comfort of your own home.
        email sking@zonelabs.com if you are interested.
        --sky
        \_ Don't you know students don't read motd?
           \_ Good point. i should email jobs@csua
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/Rants] UID:40907 Activity:nil
12/7    We are so fucked
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051207/ap_on_hi_te/india_microsoft_20
        \_ Uhm, huh?  Why?  I think you're being a tad "chicken little"-ish.
        \_ get out while you can, kid
        \_ British Raj is being replaced by the American Raj.
2005/12/7-9 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:40908 Activity:high
12/7    Where in the constitution and/or law says that you can't have a
        gun duel? How about a fist duel between two people (like boxing),
        is that still legal? If boxing is legal, how about non-lethal
        kendo stick duels, or even katana duels?
        \_ Faimiliar with Aaron Burr and Alexander Hamilton?
        \_ I'm betting where you will get in trouble with gun dueling is not
           going to be federal law but state/city law.  Specifically assault
           with a deadly weapon, manslaughter or murder, none of which are
           federal crimes (at least under normal circumstances).  You are
           allowed to box, because thats a consentual sport.  You aren't
           allowed to kill people, consentual or otherwise.
           \_ Ok, let's say there is no intent to kill. Let's say that
              ilyas and john hate each other and want to humiliate each
              other to settle their scores. They're happy to bruise each
              other and may fight it out using nothing but their fists.
              Is this legal at all?
              \_ Yes unless a passing cop decides to nail us for disturbing
                 the peace or any number of other reasons, or in response to
                 someone complaining about two crazy people beating each
                 other up.  And then, that doesn't keep either of us from
                 calling the cops on the other for assault, or from filing
                 a civil suit.  I believe boxers sign all kinds of waivers
                 before whaling on each other.  -John
              \_ In a gun duel intent to kill wouldn't matter.  If you killed
                 someone it would be manslaughter at least.  But yeah, I
                 imagine if you had a fight in the privacy of your own home
                 voluntarily with eachother, and without lasting injury there
                 wouldn't be any legal recourse. -pp
              \_ Yes, its called boxing. Get a ring.
        \_ GUN DUEL:
           http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duel
        \_ CA had a specific provision in the penal code that made Dueling
           a separate offense. This was repealed in 1994. Some states still
           have such provisions.  Strictly speaking a separate provision is
           not required to punish dueling b/c it is a general principle that
           one cannot consent to a crime against one's person. If both ppl
           survive they are both probably guilty of attempted 1st degree
           premeditated murder. If one dies the other is guilty of 1st
           degree murder. Note that there is no self defense argument b/c
           the duelers created the dangerous situation.
           \- this is a silly question but for the rest of you with
              some interest in legal history, you may wish to read
              about Ashford v. Thornton. --lord blackstone
              \_ Interesting. Thanks. For more info:
                 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_duel
                 Summary: Until 1819 dueling was an alternate
                 dispute resolution method.
                         \- well i dont think that is fully the "take away"...
                            it raises the issue of stale law, the evolution
                            of law, the back and forth between law and
                            what you might call epistemology. the interesting
                            detail here is it was essentially forgotten that
                            trial by battle was still on the books. it wasnt
                            like 1819 was the year parliament finally got rid
                            of it ... dueling and trial by battle being common
                            until then. there had not been a case of trial
                            by battle for ~200yrs before that and "the system"
                            was sort of at a loss about what to do. anyway,
                            if you are interested in legal history, this book
                            is very interesting ... Charles Rembar: The Law
                            of the Land. see also:
                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Rembar
                 \_ it is still much cheaper and saves a lot more time
                    than litigation.
2005/12/7-9 [Reference/History/WW2/Germany, Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:40909 Activity:nil
12/7    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051207/od_nm/garbage_dc
        Call of nature saves German man. HEIL GERMAN MAN!
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/HW, Computer/SW/OS] UID:40910 Activity:nil
12/7    I'm using Gallery 1.x right now for my online photo album,
        and I'm wondering whether I should upgrade to 2.x. Is
        anyone using 2, and is it worth the upgrade? Thanks.
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/SW/Languages/Perl] UID:40911 Activity:kinda low
12/7    Sure, call me crazy, but is there a way to run Perl on a PDA?
        I stfw, and all I found was a 2001 article on http://Perl.com saying
        that it's impossible, but in tech terms, this is like finding a
        1930s article saying it's impossible to send a man to the moon.
        \_ uh... which PDA?  I don't see why not, and probably the only
           issue is limited memory.
           \_ I wouldn't say limited memory is an issue w/ PDAs these
              days. I think my Treo has more memory than my first linux
              box (it certainly has a bigger "hard drive" - 1 GB flash)
              \_ Well, your Treo still has only 16 MB of RAM, much of which
                 is probably in use.  The 1 GB flash doesn't really help
                 here.  And even then, Palm OS has a pretty puny stack.
                 Anyhow, it's still an issue for some PDAs, hence my
                 question about which one.
                 \_ Well, it's more of a wishlist kind of thing. I'd like
                    a PDA that I test some scripts on; being able to read
                    a PDA that I can test some scripts on; being able to read
                    ebooks and listen to music on it wouldn't be bad, either.
                    Suggestions?
        \_ There is something for WinCE:
           http://www.rainer-keuchel.de/wince/perlce.html
           Supposedly there is a port to PalmOS, but it looks dead:
           http://sourceforge.net/projects/palmperl
           I think there are some Linux based PDAs that come w/
           Perl (Zarus?)
           \_ Is the Zaurus discontinued? I'm having a hard time finding one
              for sale....
        \_ Is JavaScript close enough?  We have pretty good DOM/JS support in
           recent versions of the AvantGo client.  --dbushong
           \_ Sorry, no, Perl-heavy work environment.
2005/12/7-9 [Uncategorized] UID:40912 Activity:nil
12/7    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4462791062611472906
        German music video of "Total Eclipse of the Heart"
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/SW/WWW/Browsers] UID:40913 Activity:kinda low
12/7    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10367598
        FYI, if you click the MSNBC TV Video (Internet Explorer only), the
        witness says the crazy dude never said anything.  Yes on the crazy,
        but you just have to take the air marshal people's word on the bomb
        threat and the reaching into the bag.
        \_ Remember that Brazilian dude they shot in London who they claimed
           had been running and jumped over the turnstyles and everything?
           It was a bunch of crap. He was just sitting there when they
           shot him. Cops will say anything to cover for other cops.
        \_ The discrepancy between the official account and witness accounts
           on the bomb threat is now leading on http://CNN.com.  Incidentally, I was
           the evil person who first wrote about this discrepancy on Wikipedia
           last night, and also wrote an e-mail then to the WP and NYT.
           Well, now the lead is "White House backs air marshals", and the
           witness accounts are only shown when you click through ... but
           witness discrepancies are only shown when you click through ... but
           I don't want to get into that.-op
2005/12/7-9 [Computer/Networking] UID:40914 Activity:nil
12/7    Anyone know of a good reseller that sells refurbished Cisco Callcenter
        bundles as well as provide install and support? Any other vendors for
        internal company VOIP providers that I should look at?
        \_ Calltower, NEC BNS, SBC are all good resellers. -shac
2005/12/7-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:40915 Activity:moderate
12/7    The Third Geneva Convention clearly states that it applies
        in all cases (see Article 2) even if the other side does
        not follow it. And that the signatories are prohibited
        from engaging in "outrages upon personal dignity, in
        particular, humiliating and degrading treatment" (Article 3)
        upon any POW (Article 4) including anyone from the former armed
        forces who has laid down their arms. If there is *any*doubt*
        about the persons status, they are assumed to be POWs until
        a "Competent Military Tribunal" has determined their
        status (Article 5). This was clearly not followed by the
        Bush Administration.
        \_ You sure about Article 2?  My read is that if there are three
           warring Powers and two Powers are signatories and one is not,
           the one Power is the exception.
           \_ No, not sure. But Iraq said it would follow the Geneva
              Convention.
              \_ Yeah, even Dubya said Geneva applies in Iraq ... however,
                 the Dubya legal team have often pointed to Article 4, Section
                 A.2 to indicate that some detainees aren't covered.  As to
                 whether they check people against this rule formally, well ...
                 yeah, if they didn't do that, we would be violating Article 5,
                 wouldn't we?
        \_ Furthermore, the Fourth Geneva Convention is intended to
           apply to all not covered by the Third.
           \_ No cigar.  Article 5, "[w]here in the territory of a Party to
              the conflict, the latter is satisfied that an individual
              protected person is definitely suspected of or engaged in
              activities hostile to the security of the State, such individual
              person shall not be entitled to claim such rights and privileges
              under the present Convention..."  In other words, armed
              insurgents, and in a later paragraph spies and saboteurs, are
              not covered by Fourth Convention.  Fortunately, "such persons
              shall nevertheless be treated with humanity and, in case of
              trial, shall not be deprived of the rights of fair and regular
              trial prescribed by the present Convention. They shall also be
              granted the full rights and privileges of a protected person
              under the present Convention at the earliest date consistent
              with the security of the State or Occupying Power, as the case
              may be."  You can certainly argue the lack of humanity.  When
              there is a trial, they will have to be treated according to
              terms laid out in the treaty.  Unfortunately, we probably get
              to decide when the trail takes place or whether better treatment
              is consistent with our security.
        \_ Yes, everyone agrees that the Geneva Convention (via Article 2)
           applies in Iraq.  Unfortunately, all that article says is that the
           Geneva Convention applies.  Article 4 defines to whom the treaty
           applies.  Unfortunately, according to Article 4, it's unlikely
           the Iraqi insurgents are covered.  Fortunately, Article 4 also
           clearly lays out what the insurgents ("organized resistance
           movements" in the language of the treaty) have to do to be covered
           (having a commander, fixed visible sign, open carry, following
           laws and customs of war).  Now why the insurgents would not
           follow these simple rules is beyond me.
           \_ Don't forget Article 5, which says if there's "any doubt" that
              someone can be covered by Geneva, they get protection until
              a "competent tribunal" judges otherwise.
              \_ And the administration would say that it approaches mathe-
                 matical certainty that the Iraqi insurgents do not meet the
                 requirements in Article 4 for an "organized resistance
                 movement" (i.e. command structure, fixed visible sign, open
                 carry, following laws and customs of war).  Therefore they
                 are not bound by the "any doubt" provision in Article 5.
                 OTOH, I am sure the adminstration and members of the US
                 armed forces would be *thrilled* if the insurgents decided
                 to act in ways consistent with the requirements of Article 4.
                 The insurgents may choose to come under the protection of the
                 Geneva Convention any time by altering their tactics and
                 behavior.
                 \_ 4.6 is probably a better bet for the insurgents than
                    4.2 b/c 4.6 only requires them to adhere to the customs
                    of war.
                    Re competent tribunal - this can be almost anything
                    including a summary procedure by a jag officer. I
                    think it will be exceedingly difficult to find a
                    single instance where someone hasn't looked over the
                    case and made an Art 4 determination.
        \_ OBTW, your claim that Article 4 covers "anyone form the former
           armed forces who has laid down their arms" is clearly misleading.
           If you read Article 4, those people are only covered by the
           treaty "if the occupying Power considers it necessary by reason
           of such allegiance [of belonging or having belonged to the armed
           forces of the occupied country] to intern them".  IOW, if a former
           member of the armed forces were arrested for being a former member
           of the armed forces, then they are protected by the Convention.
           If the former member of the armed forces were arrested for (say)
           shoplifting, then that person is *not* protected.
2005/12/7 [Uncategorized] UID:40916 Activity:nil 57%like:40919
12/7    http://maps.a9.com/?mapMode=m&mapBvr=&ypLoc=94720&mapFrom=&mapTo=
        Click somewhere on the map, then on a picture on the right side
        to see medium-res photos of Cal.  Have phun.  I believe there is
        nothing which indicates which direction they took the photos.
2005/12/7-9 [Uncategorized] UID:40919 Activity:nil 57%like:40916
12/7    http://maps.a9.com/?mapMode=m&mapBvr=&ypLoc=94720&mapFrom=&mapTo=
        Drag the magnifying glass somewhere on the map, then mouseover and
        click on the images on the right side to see medium-res photos of Cal.
        Have phun.  I did this for my neighborhood in SoCal, and those photos
        are ~ 2 years old.
2017/09/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/22    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:December:07 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>