Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:December:10 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2005/12/10-11 [Consumer/GPS] UID:40950 Activity:nil
12/9    Want to buy wife a GPS unit for car. Any recommendations? She is not
        a tech freak, so it needs to be non-geek friendly. It would also be
        nice to know which ones to avoid. TIA.
        \_ garmin c320, $400 @ amazon
2005/12/10-11 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:40951 Activity:insanely high
12/9    "Use democracy to DEFEAT LIBERTY.

        Turn the people against their own liberty. Convince them that
        liberty is licentiousness - that liberty undermines piety,
        leads to crime, drugs, rampant homosexuality, children out of
        wedlock, and family breakdown.

        And worst of all, LIBERALISM is soft on communism or terrorism - (or
        WHATEVER happens to be the enemy of the moment.)

        And if you can convince the people that liberty undermines their
        SECURITY, then, you will not have to take away their liberty; they
        will gladly renounce it." -Irvine Kristol, father of Neoconservatism
        \_ This is really dishonest.  This is not a quote of Kristol as you
           claimed.  This is actually a quote of Shadia Drury from her essay
           "Saving America--Leo Strauss and the neoconservatives".  This is
           not what Kristol said; this is Drury's spin on what Kristol said.
           And then on top of misrepresenting the quote, you threw in some
           extra capitalizations that were not in the source.  Advocacy is one
           thing, outright lying is quite another.  You should be ashamed.
           (http://evatt.org.au/publications/papers/112.html has the original
           Drury essay.)
           \_ I am not sure if I am ashamed, but I am glad to be set straight.
              Serves me right for using a random partisan blog as a source.
              \_ What?  A partisan blog lied and misrepresented an opposing
                 view?  I'm *SHOCKED*!  Nay, I'm *SHOCKED*!  *laugh*  When you
                 get your info from shitty biased sources, of course you'll get
                 propaganda and be misled as to what other people have said
                 and think and you'll end up hating them.  The motd is a great
                 example of this.  BushCo lied, People died!  Halliburton!
                 Damn, this is funny.  I'm busting up.
                 \_ Actually, the motd is much better at correcting errors
                    than most media sources.
                 \_ You are right, Bush told the truth and no one has died
                    in Iraq. And Halliburton has not many any money from
                    War Profiteering. Anyone who says otherwise is a partisan.
                    \_ BushCo lied, people died implies that Bush knew the
                       the true situtation in Iraq and chose to act anyway.
                       His knowledge of the true situation has not been
                       convincingly demonstrated.
                       \_ We know that he has lied about Congress having
                          "the same intelligence" that he did.  We know that
                          he fired generals who told him planning requirements
                          that he didn't like, whose predictions have turned
                          out to come true.  If Bush didn't lie, he was simply
                          incompetent.  I don't know which is worse.
                          \_ Gee, isn't this pretty disingenuous?  The fact
                             that the slogan is "BushCo lied..." says pretty
                             much that lying is worse.
                       \_ The word "lie" has more than one meaning, as anyone
                          with even a casual knowledge of the English language
                          knows. You have chosen, for entirely partisan reasons,\
                          to pick the meaning that makes the people that use
                          knows. You have chosen, for entirely partisan reasons,
                          to pick the meaning that makes the people that use
                          it look the most extreme. You are being disingenous
                          yourself, to put it charitably.

                          \_ I'm surprised _your_ lie has been allow to sit
                             here unquestioned for so long.  The common and
                             primary usage of the word "lie" is the one that
                             involves intentional and knowing deception.  This
                             is *not* the "extreme" definition of the word
                             "lie".  It is *the* definition of the word "lie".
                             Any other definitions you might like to use would
                             not only be uncommon but would lead to confusing
                             your audience if you didn't mean "intentional and
                             knowing deception".  You are being extremely
                             intellectually dishonest.  A 2 second dictionary
                             check would have shown that.  So would asking any
                             normal human being on the street or any 5 year
                             old what they thought the word "lie" means.
                             You're just struggling to save the "Bush Lied,
                             People Died" rhetoric and doing a bad job of it.
                             Bush, the CIA, several other western intelligence
                             agencies, the Russians, and the entire Clinton
                             administration were wrong about WMD in Iraq.
                             None of these people lied, as we found out later
                             Saddam's own people were lying to him telling him
                             he had weapons and capabilities he didn't have.
                             The upper tiers of Iraqi government thought they
                             had WMD.  Come play again anytime and bring a
                             dictionary or a 5 year old next time.
                             \_   Lie \Lie\ (l[imac]), n. [AS. lyge; akin to
                                  D. leugen, OHG. lugi,
                                  G. l["u]ge, lug, Icel. lygi, Dan. &
                                  Sw. l["o]gn, Goth. liugn.
                                  See {Lie} to utter a falsehood.]
                                2. A fiction; a fable; an untruth. --Dryden.
                                [1913 Webster]
                                Quite seriously, your English skills, as well
                                as your ability to use simple research tools,
                                such as a dictionary, must be seriously
                                deficient. In the English language, words
                                   \_ You are an idiot.  "dict lie" and look
                                      for the definition that covers truth
                                      and not physical position.  You'll see
                                      quite clearly that to lie means to
                                      intentionally deceive.  If this wasn't
                                      the motd I'd be stunned that someone
                                      would have the balls to present some
                                      random fuck #2 definition from some
                                      unknown place they've carefully chosen
                                      to cover their first lie and then
                                      falsely accuse someone else of having
                                      poor research skills or English language
                                      ability.  If this was something as
                                      low level as Rhetoric 1A you'd get an
                                      "F" for an argument like that.  But
                                      since this is the motd, I expect lies
                                      (intentional knowing falsehood) as a
                                      weak attempt to bolster a weak partisan
                                      position.
                                      \_ The most amusing thing about your
                                         diatribe is that this definition above
                                         comes from using "dict lie" on soda.
                                         Are you trolling in a deliberate
                                         effort to look stupid?
                                often have multiple meanings and it is not
                                incorrect to use an alternate meaning, though
                                perhaps confusing to some people. I talked to
                                a linguist about this, and he says it is an
                                example of a "contested case" where some
                                people believe their definition is correct
                                and the other definitions are incorrect, but
                                a simple use of the dictionary will show you
                                to be wrong. The word "lie" is used both
                                ways in the English language. You also
                                (deliberately?) misread my simple statement
                                about your picking the definition that allowed
                                you to paint the users of it as political
                                extremists. I said nothing about the "extreme
                                definition" of the word, you either twisted
                                or misunderstood what I meant.
                                or misunderstood what I meant. Five year
                                olds don't define the language.
                                \_ So, in your opinion, did the OP of this
                                   thread lie?  Should he be ashamed of having
                                   lied?
                                   \_ Sure, he (me actually) lied, by some
                                      definitions of the word. He should be
                                      ashamed of doing only casual fact
                                      checking, which in this case was
                                      a Google search of the quote, which
                                      turns up many other examples of people
                                      spreading this falsehood.
                                      \_ So you are ashamed for not having
                                         fact checked, but not ashamed for
                                         having lied.  So in your mind, the
                                         lie was morally neutral?  Afterall,
                                         if the lie were morally reprehensible,
                                         shouldn't you feel shame?  Would you
                                         say that in your case, "you lied" is
                                         equivalent to "you said something
                                         incorrect because you believed in the
                                         wrong source"?
                                         \_ Yes. If it makes you feel any better
                                            I personally have stopped using the
                                            construct "Bush lied" because of the
                                            confusion it engenders. I prefer
                                            the phrase "Bush is a bullshitter"
                                            because I think it more accurately
                                            describes the relationship that
                                            the Bush White House has with
                                            veracity.
                                            \_ Great!  I must tell you (and I
                                               assure you that I do so without
                                               any sarcasm whatsoever) that I
                                               admire your honesty and integrity
                                               in this discussion.  I think Bush
                                               was wrong, premature, lacked
                                               planning and foresight, and a
                                               whole host of other unpleasant
                                               things.  However, I do not think
                                               he lied (in the sense of the word
                                               that is morally reprehensible and
                                               requires an intent to deceive).
                             \_ Here are some examples of the second use of
                                the word:
                                http://csua.org/u/e96 (Kerry lied)
                                http://www.techcentralstation.com/101405D.html
                                http://csua.org/u/e97 (Bush lied about attack)
                                Now all of these are politically charged
                                debates, but they all accuse the other of
                                "lies" when falsehoods would have been a
                                more clear statement. But nonetheless,
                                they used the word "lie" as many many
                                speakers of the English language do in
                                this situation.
                                \_ Sure!  In the sense that 'Bush lied' ==
                                   'Bush was incorrect in a morally neutral
                                   way because he believed in the wrong
                                   source".  I'm ok with that.  However,
                                   'BushCo was incorrect in a morally neutral
                                   way because he believed in the wrong source,
                                   people died' doesn't have that nice ring
                                   to it.  OBTW, at least in your first 2
                                   references there is a sense that the "lie"
                                   were told with the intent to deceive.  In
                                   the Kerry case, one could reasonably assume
                                   that Kerry knew what he did during and after
                                   the Vietnam war, and the website claimed that
                                   that Kerry knew he did during and after the
                                   Vietnam war, and the website claimed that
                                   Kerry gave a "scrubbed" version of his
                                   activities later.  The 2nd reference claimed
                                   the media was "inventing" stories.  I think
                                   by definition invention requires on the part
                                   of the inventor knowledge that the story is
                                   not true.  In the last case, the question
                                   hinges on whether Bush knew he was wrong
                                   when he claimed that the Irqais were in
                                   charge.  This was not addressed in the
                                   link (though honestly I have not read
                                   through all the comments), and therefore it
                                   is not clear where the article and the
                                   claim of "Bush lied" falls.  Thanks for
                                   proving my point, BTW.
                                   activities during his presidential campaign.
                                   The 2nd reference claimed the media was
                                   "inventing" stories.  I think by definition
                                   invention requires on the part of the
                                   inventor the story is not based on actual
                                   truth.
                                   inventor knowledge that the story is not
                                   true.
                                   \_ Waitasec. Are you saying that you believe
                                      that Bush looked at all the information
                                      and drew an impartial and logical
                                      conclusion? 'Cos looking at the intel
                                      now, I don't see how he drew the
                                      conclusions he did without having a
                                      distinct bias. It is clear now that he
                                      had already made up his mind and he was
                                      only looking for intel that supported
                                      his ideas, and the rest could go hang.
                                      In this regard, he intentionally withheld
                                      the truth of the matter from the
                                      American people, which, by your own
                                      definition, constitutes lying.
                                      \_ Nope.  I think Bush looked at the
                                         information he had and drew a
                                         conclusion.  Did he look at all the
                                         evidence impartially, dispassionately,
                                         whatever?  Not likely.  Still he
                                         reached a conclusion.  He believed
                                         that his conclusion was correct, and
                                         he led the country into war based on
                                         that.  Which means he may have been
                                         stupid, premature, illogical,
                                         emotional, short-sided, etc., but he
                                         emotional, short-sighted, etc., but he
                                         did not lie.  Did he withhold "the
                                         truth"?  What truth?  There's his
                                         truth, your truth, my truth.  Maybe
                                         there's even *the* truth.  Who knows?
                                         He told us what he believed was true.
                                         If a child who just learned addition
                                         told you earnestly that 7+8=13, did
                                         the child lie?  Or was he just honestly
                                         wrong?  If you write down the wrong
                                         answer on a mid-term, did you lie?
                                         Or were you just wrong?
                                         \_ Do you think Bush told the truth?
                                            \_ I think he told what he thought
                                               was the truth.
                                               \_ It is a yes or no question.
                                                  \_ Whose truth?  Bush told
                                                     the truth as he understood
                                                     it.
                                                     \_ Bullshit.
                                                        "Iraq has weapons of
                                                         mass destruction" was
                                                         not a lie.  "We have
                                                         evidence that Iraq
                                                         has weapons of mass
                                                         destruction" was, in
                                                         fact, a deliberate lie.
                                                         I think that Bush could
                                                         have stuck with the
                                                         first of these and
                                                         justified the war
                                                         (which I supported),
                                                         but he chose to lie
                                                         about the evidence,
                                                         and that is important
                                                         (impeachable, IMO).
                                                        \_ I take it that you
                                                           agree with my propo-
                                                           sition that if Bush
                                                           merely told the
                                                           truth as he under-
                                                           stood it, he did not
                                                           lie.
                                   \_ Nope. Kerry repeated what he had been
                                      told by other sources, that he believed.
                                      It turned out that these guys weren't
                                      even Vets, but Kerry had no way of
                                      knowing that. The Kerry lied crowd knows
                                      this but still accuse him of lying.
                                      \_ If I may read between the lines, are
                                         you saying the "Kerry lied" crowd
                                         should not have accused him of lying?
                                         If so, thanks for making my point for
                                         me.
                                         \_ I don't hold an opinion one way
                                            or another on the morality of
                                            accusing a politician of lying.
                                            I am just pointing out to you how
                                            the English language is used. I am
                                            sure I could come up with hundreds
                                            of examples, given enough time.
                                            You could, too.
                                            \_ Well, I am perfectly happy with
                                               2 kinds of lie: one that is
                                               honest mistake with no intent
                                               to deceive, and the other that
                                               is deliberately untrue with an
                                               aim to deceive.  I think there
                                               is no moral stigma associated
                                               with the first, and the second
                                               is morally reprehensible.  I
                                               also think that, given these
                                               two definitions of lie, Bush's
                                               belong to the first category.
                                               And, given there is no intent
                                               to deceive, there is also no
                                               moral probihition against it.
                                               Like I said, I'm ok with the
                                               formulation 'Bush lied' == 'Bush
                                               was incorrect in a morally
                                               neutral way because he believed
                                               in the wrong source".
                          \_ I'd be more comfortable w/ 'Bush misled, people
                             bled' b/c lie specifically requires knowledge of
                             the truth. In this case, knowledge of the truth
                             has not, and likely cannot be, demonstrated.
                             bled.' To me lie specifically implies a knowledge
                             of the truth, which I do not think can be shown
                             in this context.
                             \_ 'misled'? What is this if not a euphemism
                                for 'lied'?
                                \_ Actually, no.  "lied" requires the liar to
                                   have knowledge of the truth, or at least
                                   knowledge of the lack of the truth.
                                   "misled" allows for mistake or ignorance
                                   on the part of the misleading person. - !pp
                                   "misled" allows for mistake on the part of
                                   the misleading person. - !pp
                                   \_ That would be 'mistaken.'
                                      \_ Ummm no.  Use 'misled' in a sentence.
                                         Then use 'mistaken' in its place in
                                         the same sentence.
                                         \_ Clever, but not a direct substi-
                                            tution. Instead of saying that the
                                            President misled the people into
                                            believing that the war was just,
                                            I would say that the President was
                                            mistaken in believing that the war
                                            was just, and he therefore led us
                                            into war while laboring under this
                                            mistake. He misled us; in order to
                                            do so, he engaged in deceit, also
                                            called lying.
                                            \_ No, you are wrong.  A lie
                                               is an untruth given with the
                                               intent to deceive.  Note that
                                               it requires an intent.  I would
                                               not be lying to you if I told
                                               you the sun rises in the west,
                                               so long as I believe that to be
                                               true.  I may have been wrong
                                               when I said the sun rises in
                                               the west, but I did not lie,
                                               because I did not intend to
                                               deceive you with that untruth.
                                               deceive you.
                                               \_ And in that regard you
                                                  would have been *mistaken*,
                                                  and you would not have
                                                  _misled_ me so much as
                                                  _mistakenly led me to
                                                  believe_. Regardless of
                                                  which, Bush *chose* to
                                                  ignore every sign that his
                                                  intel and sources were not
                                                  correct and created an
                                                  environment in which any
                                                  evidence for an opposing view
                                                  was discarded out of hand.
                                                  When he said we had no choice
                                                  but to invade, he was imply-
                                                  ing that he had explored all
                                                  possibilities; that was a
                                                  lie. From that complexity
                                                  to "Bush lied, peoplde died"
                                                  is an unfortunate simplifi-
                                                  cation, I agree, but no
                                                  less true.
                                                  \_ An "unfortunate
                                                     siimplification"?  Who's
                                                     into carefully chosen
                                                     euphemisms now?
                                                     \_ Pray tell, what is
                                                        "unfortunate simplifi-
                                                        cation" a carefully
                                                        chosen euphemism for?
                                                        \_ "Inaccurate"?
                                                           "Wrong"?
                                                \_ If you look just one
                                                   paragraph down you will
                                                   see someone accused of
                                                   lying, who had no knowledge
                                                   that what he was saying was
                                                   false before he uttered it.
                                                   How can you ignore the
                                                   evidence right in front
                                                   of your eyes?
                                                  \_ An "unfortunate
                                                     siimplificatoin"?  Who's
                                                     into carefully chosen
                                                     euphemisms now?
                                                   \_ Actually, this exactly
                                                      proves my point (and
                                                      it should, since I also
                                                      wrote that post).  Since
                                                      the originator of the
                                                      thread posted in error
                                                      (or he was misled by his
                                                      partisan website, to use
                                                      the language of this
                                                      subthread), I did not
                                                      castigate him for "not
                                                      [being] ashamaed for
                                                      lying".  I so stipulated
                                                      because to my mind, and
                                                      I assume to his (since
                                                      he is not ashamed) he
                                                      did not lie, since he
                                                      thought he posted a
                                                      truth.  The OP was
                                                      merely mistaken.  That is
                                                      why I took him to task
                                                      for not exercising his
                                                      critical judgement
                                                      instead.
              \_ If you believed Kristol (or anyone in this media age) would
                 be stupid enough to have actually said this, then you should
                 be too stupid to be admitted to Cal.  If you're not ashamed
                 for lying, then you should be ashamed for not exercising
                 your critical judgement.
                 \_ If Bush can say dumbass things like "What an impressive
                    crowd: the haves, and the have-mores. Some people call
                    you the elite, I call you my base" and get away with it,
                    it is not that unreasonable to think someone like Kristol
                    might say something like that. Especially many years
                    ago, before the Internet, when people tended to speak
                    more freely in front of crowds. Or maybe I am just
                    a dumbass.
                    \_ I actually found it very reasuring when Bush said that,
                       since that crowd will never allow the Religious Right
                       to totally destroy American science and turn America
                       into a theocracy.  The rich bastard section of the GOP
                       seems like the least loathesome faction, and they keep
                       the real fuckers at bay.
                    \_ You are just a dumbass.
                 \_ I assume you are not the same fellow criticizing
                    the anti-war crowd for saying that Bush lied, right?
                    If so, it would be pretty ironic.
            \_ There are many ways to make money other than real estate.
               I made more than 100k in the stock market since 2002,
               with about 30% annual return.  And the PE ratio of S&P500
               is actually lower now than in 2002, unlike the ridiculous
               Price/Rent ratio of homes in the Bay Area.
2005/12/10-12 [Computer/SW/Security, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA] UID:40952 Activity:nil
12/10   Where can I find the new ssh keys?
        \_ http://csua.berkeley.edu/computing/hardware
2005/12/10-12 [Computer/SW/Languages/Java] UID:40953 Activity:kinda low
12/10   Java is the SUV of programming languages:
        http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/philg/2003/09/20#a1762
        \_ A great title and a horrid horrid blog entry.  The title alone
           I could so get behind, but the authors reasons for his arguement
           are beyond bad and often flat out wrong.
        \_ Kind of sad that MIT students are having trouble with Java.
           \_ I was hacking a little java together earlier today, but
              then I couldn't find javac.  Is it installed here?  -mel
              \_ don't tell me you installed JRE and expect to find javac.
                 \_ No, I was trying to use a common installation instead
                    of making my own and didn't find one.  I worked on
                    the reference implementation for java 0.9 and am
                    quite familiar with the difference between the JRE
                    and the JDK. -mel
        \_ Isn't the writer the ArsDigita guy?
           \_ Yes, its philg of http://photo.net and arsdigita fame.
2005/12/10-11 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:40954 Activity:low 85%like:40948
12/9    Prince of Russia:
        http://tinyurl.com/dgazk (video.google.com)
        \_ That is just fucking awesome.  Thanks.  -John
           \_ Parkour also shown in the movie "Banlieue 13".
           \_ Seconded, that was tight.
        \_ Is the soundtrack French Rap?
           \_ Yes. Parkour is big in france:
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkour
              Here is a video of founder David Belle in action:
                http://tinyurl.com/9zaqe (video.google.com)
              Personally I think the Russian guy is better.
2005/12/10 [Uncategorized] UID:40955 Activity:nil 88%like:40958
12/10   RIP Richard Pryor:
        http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/13378508.htm
2005/12/10-12 [Uncategorized] UID:40956 Activity:nil
12/10   So linxu, how are you planning to relate to the allumni?
        \_ There's always motd.
2005/12/10-12 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:40957 Activity:moderate
12/10   Anyone here use Buzilla for work?  On Windows?  How's your experience
        been?  We're using an old version of DevTrack and would like to change
        to something else.
        \_ Bugzilla? Yes. What do you mean "On Windows"? You mean you want
           to run on IIS?
           \_ No, we're already running svn on apache2 for Windows (so it would
              be with apache--we may be largely a windows shop but we're not
              stupid enough to use IIS).  Have you used anything other than
              Bugzilla?  How does it compare?
        \_ We used Bugzilla on Solaris for years at PlanetOut. We are now
           transitioning to Jira. I liked Bugzilla just fine. -ausman
           \_ Why the transition then?
              \_ The project managers and programmers didn't really like
                 it that much. It worked fine for IT project tracking,
                 but Jira is more flexible. I haven't used the latter
                 enough to have an opinion about it.
                 \_ I'm a programmer asking the question.  What did the
                    programmers not like about it?
        \_ We used Bugzilla on Linux for several years until Sun forced
           us to switch to Bugtraq. Bugzilla wasn't perfect but it worked
           fairly well.
2005/12/10-12 [Transportation/Car] UID:40958 Activity:nil 88%like:40955
12/10   RIP Richard Pryor:
        http://tinyurl.com/c445k (mercurynews.com)
        \_ "Police in L.A., man, they got a chokehold they use on
           motherfuckers. Do they do it here, do they choke you to death?
           That's some weird shit. Cause I didn't know it was a death penalty
           to have a parking ticket."
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2005:December:10 Saturday <Friday, Sunday>