Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:January:05 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2006/1/5-10 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:41237 Activity:very high
1/5     Dear mature home owners, maybe I'm young and stupid, but I want
        to know some of the justifications for your irrational needs.
        What exactly is the purpose of a formal dining room? My mom has
        a 4500 sq ft house and the formal dining room has been
        used twice in an entire decade. Secondly, what is the purpose of
        having a separate living room used for meeting guests and a
        family room? My mom's living room is rarely used and is there
        mostly for looks-- her guests usually go directly to the family
        room since it has a nice TV and is closer to the kitchen. Lastly,
        what exactly is the purpose of a large backyard with lots of
        grass when it is often used less than once a month?
        \_ Hello, I guess I'm an immature home owner because I have not
           yet expanded into all of my space.  However, I plan on using
           the "formal" living room as an office.  The "formal" dining
           room will be a dining room, 'cause my kitchen table can't
           accommodate more than 4, nor could the kitchen.  I'm growing
           fruit trees and vegetables in my back yard.  Said deciduous
           trees also shade the house in summer and allow sun through in
           winter.  Other uses for the spare space could include workout
           room, etc.  --PM
        \_ What you consider an irrational need, other people consider a
           nice thing to have.  You are too stuck on absolute utilitarian
           necessity and the rhetoric of class warfare.  People were not
           meant to be crammed into tiny psychosis inducing apartments.
           Wanting a large living space, nice things, and a generally
           attractive living environment is supremely rational.
        \_ I can tell you that my sister spent about $60,000 on her fancy
           front yard with gazeebo, statue, malibu lights, waterfountain,
           and other things. One time I went to her backyard and found
           moldy, deformed boxes which were once malibu light boxes
           where the workers left them a few months ago. I asked her about
           them and she said she hadn't noticed them. The only time
           she'd go to the backyard was when she had guests, so she
           could show off her fancy McBackyard. Oh and by the way
           she has a 4 bedroom McMansion and the only people living
           in it is... her. Suburbia is a total waste of land and
           resources, but as you already know, people are stupid.
        \_ Geez man, she lives in a 4500sq ft house.  Of course there's a
           lot of wasted space.  You could comfortably house 3 families in
           that much space.  As the above poster says, it's all just
           conspicuous consumption. -jrleek
        \_ A formal dining room is useful if you throw a lot of dinner parties
           or have old-fashioned sit down dinners as a family.  Otherwise it's
           just for show.
           \_ It's also good if you have big multiplayer board games.
              \_ Or have poker games with lots of people.
        \_ I always thought the formal dining is there so you can sell your
           house to people who want a formal dining room.  Me, I converted
           mine into an office, and it works great.  I'll deconvert back into
           a dining room when I sell.  The backyard is there for your kids.
           In fact, a friend is moving specifically for a larger backyard so
           his kids can have more play room.  The larger yard is also great
           for more buffer space between you and your neighbors.
        \_ These are artifacts of older housing concepts. Formal dining rooms
           just used to be the room you ate in, before the invention of the
           breakfast nook. Living rooms were styled after parlors and located
           in the front of the house to avoid tramping through a cluttered
           house, while family rooms were invented for the "back of the house".
           The more informal family and social life became and the less people
           entertained, the less need for these distictions. Large backyards
           were important because of a lack of green space (parks), to allow
           for entertaining, and to boost the ego. Land is still land.
        \_ It is simple: having nice things and lots of space gives people a
           warm n fuzzy feeling.  There is nothing irrational about it.  If
           you stepped back from the class warfare language and pre-judgement
           of those with a life style you can't afford, you'd soon realise
           that "living" in a 650 square foot apartment isn't living.  You
           look at something you might never be able to afford and call it
           irrational.  People who have it can't imagine how you could stand
           to live in a rat hole apartment.  High density housing sucks to
           live in and going skiing a few times a year or having a nice park
           nearby doesn't make up for it.
           \_ I could afford to live in a large house in the suburbs or a
              smaller condo in the city and I chose the city. I could even
              afford a larger place in San Francisco if I wanted it, but I
              don't. Not even's concept of self worth is tied up in their
              over consumption. I prefer high density housing and so do
              many people. Get off your high horse.
              \_ I think the person on the high horse is the OP. I like
                 having a FDR and a large back yard. I go out in the yard
                 every single day, because I like to garden. When I
                 entertain, I either entertain outside or in my FDR and
                 living room. The family room is upstairs and is sort of
                 a 'junk room' I don't invite guests to. In short, just
                 because a few people are putzes with more space than they
                 use doesn't mean everyone choosing a house over high-density
                 living is. I think 4500 square feet is excessive, but
                 then I couldn't afford that if I took out 3 mortgages.
              \_ I never said anything about self worth.  Don't project.  It
                 is entirely about personal space and comfort for those who
                 have.  I'm glad you have chosen to pay more to get less in
                 the city.  That is a wise investment.  Actually, most of the
                 people in high density housing are the poor.  I wouldn't
                 really call being poor a "choice" they made.
                 \_ Tell all the people living in South Beach, Telegraph
                    Hill, Nob Hill and Russian Hill that they are poor.
                    In most of the world the most desirable places to
                    live are in the city center, where density allows for
                    all the advantages of urban living. And is your
                    "that is a wise investment" line intended to be
                    sarcasm? It is hard to tell over ascii whether you
                    are being serious or not.
                    \_ Well, the pp said "most of the people in high density
                       housing are the poor".  IOW, we're counting heads here.
                       So, in SF, are there more people in expensive areas
                       like Nob Hill or in poor areas like the Tenderloin?
                       Are there more expensive neighborhoods or poor
                       neighboorhoods?  Are there more rich people or poor
                       people?  They can pack a lot of people
                       into projects, and it'll take a large area of luxe
                       apts and such to balance the head count. - !pp
                    Perhaps as a global world-wide statement "most of
                    of the people in high density housing are poor" is
                    true, but it is not true in San Francisco or even
                    the Bar Area.
                    \_ Rich people live in spacious penthouses in the
                       middle of the city, not shitty ratholes. Then they
                       fly out to the Hamptons or Aspen or whatever on
                       the weekends to unwind. While Manhattan is
                       expensive, the *average* apartment in Manhattan is
                       a dump - unless you are rich, of course.
           \_ I grew up in a big city where 95% of the people lived in
              apartments, so I am used to it   Living in a big house would
              be nice but living beyond my needs seems wasteful.  I finally
              bought a townhouse just so I can host my church fellowship
              gatherings at my place.  Other friends have bigger houses,
              but they are out of the way, whereas my place is centrally
              located so everyone can come without travelling too far.
                                           - yet another poster
              \_ You could afford more if you weren't tithing your 10%
                 \_ sure.  I had not been tithing a full pre-tax 10%
                    before last year.  Then I decided to start doing it
                    early last year after quite a bit of struggling, and
                    within 2 months, my stocks did so well that the
                    capital gains would be enough to cover 3 full years
                    of tithing.  Just goes to show how small we are and
                    how great God is.  We tithe because we should, not
                    because God would bless us because of it, but in
                    regard to tithing, Bible does says: "Test me in this,
                    and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of
                    heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will
                    not have room enough for it."  Malachi 3:8-12
                    http://tinyurl.com/bz5d4
                    Note that I am not saying that Christians have to
                    offer 10% pre-tax.  It's not a matter of following
                    a rule, or of judging people based on that.  It's
                    a matter of your heart and love of the Lord, and
                    love of your brothers and sisters and fellow men.
                    \_ I think you are a false Mormon.  Jesus quite clearly
                       teaches in the Bible that your faith in God has
                       nothing to do with your material wealth.  Unless
                       the book of Moroni has a few extra chapters not
                       being shared with the class.
                       \_ I am not a Mormon.
                    \_ So, you came into extra money and didn't tithe on that?
                       naughty boy.
                       \_ Like I said, it's not a matter of following
                          rules.  For capital gains, for me, since it's
                          for generating an income post-retirement,
                          I will just continue tithing that income
                          when I retire, and leave 10% of what I have
                          when I die.
                    \_ Why don't you tithe it to me next year, and cut out
                       the wasteful middlemen?
                       \_ You are funny, but I don't think you have
                          a need for it.
                          \_ Ever checked out the LDS Church balance sheets?
                             I can assure you I need it a lot more than it
                             does. I'd even share it with some other sodans.
                             \_ they make those public?
                                \_ I was glib... estimated assets are...
                                   large. ($tens of billions)
                             \_ if you want some, just join their church.
                             \_ My church is a small Lutheran church.
                    \_ You started tithing and your stocks went up.  Do you
                       actually think those are related?  Just think of how many
                       people God would be hurting if he made _your_ stocks go
                       up to reward you.
                       \_ Why would my stocks going up necessarily hurt
                          anyone.  The stock that went up most is doing
                          vaccine and antibodies production research for
                          diseases like flu, ebola, malaria, west nile,
                          rabies, etc.
                          vaccine production research for diseases
                          like flu, ebola, malaria, west nile, etc.
        \_ I don't think that the presence of a dining room in most homes
           is that controversial. I, for one, strongly believe that
           meals should be normally consumed in the company of your
           relatives, if possible, at a dining table and not in the
           living room or in the bedroom in front of TV. In many
           homes, the dining room is just an extension of either the
           kitchen or the living room which is fine. However, having
           separate family and living rooms seems to be less common
           is that controversial. I, for one, strongly believe that meals
           should be normally consumed in the company of your relatives at
           a dining table and not in the living room or in the bedroom in
           front of TV. In many homes, the dining room is just an extension
           of either the kitchen or the living room which is fine. However,
           having separate family and living rooms seems to be less common
           (and less useful) indeed.
2006/1/5-6 [Politics/Foreign/Europe] UID:41238 Activity:nil
1/4     Jesus on trial in Italy:
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/01/04/italy.jesus.reut/index.html
2006/1/5-7 [Science/Electric] UID:41239 Activity:nil
1/5     Mindstorms TNG:
        http://tinyurl.com/bcr3e (lego.com)
        \_ http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,69946-0.html
2006/1/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41240 Activity:nil
 1/5    Grep for 'socialist motherfucker'
        http://tinyurl.com/asus3 - danh
2006/1/5-7 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:41241 Activity:nil
1/5     Microsoft to release WMF patch today at 2pm Pacific Time
        http://myitforum.com/blog/rtrent/archive/2006/01/05/18131.aspx
        fyi, Ilfak recently said you can uninstall his patch before or
        after you install the MS patch.
        \_ Looks like it's out now.
        \_ http://www.microsoft.com/windows/windowsmedia/format/default.aspx
           "Windows Media Format is the highest quality, most secure and ..."
           Ha ha.
           \_ Uhm, the WMF exploit involves WMF files (Windows Metafile),
              Microsoft's version of Encapsulated PostScript.  It doesn't have
              anything to do with Windows Media.
        \_ Don't forget to re-register the DLL in case you un-registered it.
           Otherwise the default image viewer in XP doesn't work.
2006/1/5-7 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux] UID:41242 Activity:low
1/6     Debian or Fedora for a corporate server? Discuss. Show work.
        \_ FreeBSD
           \_ I agree that FreeBSD is a far better choice in terms of
              stability (notwithstanding soda's hick-ups), performance
              and security. But if you have to use Linux and the only
              two choices are Debian and Fedora, debian is preferable
              b/c it is far easier to install a minial debian system
              and keep it upto date in terms of security and reliabi-
              lity patches.
              The problem w/ Debian is that many commercial vendors
              (my company included) do not support running their sw
              on Debian. If a vendor only supports RH, it is worth
              spending the extra money to buy RHEL. If you can't
              afford RHEL ES, try running the software on the CentOS
              equivalent before going to Fedora.  Fedora has way too
              many bleeding edge components and probably will not
              give you the type of stability you want for a corporate
              server. [ Although we support our server software on
              Fedora, we strongly recommend that customers use RHEL
              ES b/c those customers who have used Fedora to run our
              software have always run into numerous problems w/ net,
              raid, scsi, &c. ]
              If you are looking to buy a server w/ the OS installed,
              consider an XServe w/ MacOS X Server 10.4. I have an
              XServe and I find it to be a very nice system.
              \_ I am not limited to fedora or debian but this is a startup
                 company so we do things as cheap as possible. I would
                 prefer freeBSD as well but it is unclear what applications
                 we will be running in the future and so I would rather
                 be a bit more flexible with Linux. CentOS I had never heard
                 of so I think that will be a good choice.
                 \_ Low-end servers are not that expensive.  FreeBSD is rock-
                    solid and nad good hardware support, as well as being
                    very reliable for many of the "normal" types of apps
                    small companies are likely to run.  Consider it.  -John
        \_ CentOS -- easier to convince the droids
        \_ Hrm does debian even have an offical 64 bit version of Xeon? Fedora
           does...
        \_ I think it's crazy to run Fedora on a production server.  It
           moves way too quickly.  CentOS or RHEL make much more sense.
           Debian is also reasonable.  -tom
           \_ I second RHEL, and even that moves almost too fast.
           \_ How about X/OS?  (Free RHEL)
              \_ Sounds like the same concept as CentOS, but CentOS looks
                 a lot more active.  -tom
        \_ Windows of course.
        \_ This may be of some use to you; The Linux Distro Chooser:
           http://www.zegeniestudios.net/ldc/index.php?lang=en
2006/1/5-7 [Reference/Religion] UID:41243 Activity:moderate
1/5     Pat Robertson.. Always good for a (nervous) laugh
        http://jta.org/page_view_breaking_story.asp?intid=770
        \_ bahahaha. what a nutjob.
        \_ How can even moderate religious types not see that giving credit to
           God for good things and not crediting him for having any hand in the
           bad is intellectually bankrupt?  (Mostly thinking of the WVA coal
           mine thing, but this reminded me of it)
           \- ages ago religion explained the natural world, was a source
              \_ It still does for much of the electorate.  -John
              of values and had an element on creating communities. i suppose
              resonable people can cleave to the community aspect. it's ok
              i suppose as a source of values but people should grant it
              doesnt have a monopoly on that. but people who believe religion
              has a role in explaining the natural world are dumbasses. it's
              better to ignore/mock/pray to the flying sphagetti monster for
              their demise than try to understand or engage with them. --psb
              their demise than try to understand or engage with them.
           \_ Because Christians believe that God gives us everything, and we
              should be thankful for everything.  Even the difficult
              experiences in life.  Furthermore, pride is dangerous and so we
              try not to take excessive credit for our successes.
              \_ "God gives us everything" denies all acts of man and nature.
                 God is not routinely thanked for "initiating the system of
                 the universe"; He's thanked for doing very specific things
                 (saving little Timmy, rescuing mine workers, saving that one
                 hour in New Orleans, etc).  That's what I'm saying is
                 house in New Orleans, etc).  That's what I'm saying is
                 intellectually bankrupt.
                 \_ you forgot free throws.  -tom
                 \_ Oh, on that I agree.  To claim that God did specific things
                    without claiming a gift of prophecy is indeed ridiculous.
                    Oh, and that includes Pat Robertson. -emarkp
                    \_ Ok I'll bite: so claiming the gift of prophecy would
                       make it not ridiculous?
                       \_ It does make it consistent.  And then the claim of
                          prophecy might be testable. -emarkp
                          prophecy might be testable.  Now that I reread the
                          article, Robertson didn't say what the headline said.
                          He did not say that God did something. -emarkp
                          \_ Indeed. But then it might be the case that the
                             gift was due to a pact with Lucifer, or
                             Witchcraft. So we should apply the principles
                             of http://www.malleusmaleficarum.org. I
                             think we should start with Robertson.
                             (re: your last point, he said God is punishing
                             Sharon. so... what?)
                             \_ No, he didn't say that.
                                \_ He said: "God says, 'This land belongs to
                                   me. You better leave it alone.'" How's that?
                                   (He also said "[Sharon] was dividing...
                                   Woe unto..." which == "God punished him"
                                   to non-idiots.)
            \_ On these questions, I suggest reading the Book of Job.
               For those who've heard the beautiful hymn "It is Well With My
               Soul", written last century by a Chicago businessman after
               he lost all five of his children, here's a link to the story:
               http://www.christianity.ca/church/worship/2004/02.000.html
               Here's the song:
               http://www.cyberhymnal.org/htm/i/t/i/itiswell.htm
               http://www.geocities.com/cott1388/spafford.html
               Here's the lyrics for the song:
               http://my.homewithgod.com/heavenlymidis2/soul.html
               http://www.hymnsite.com/lyrics/umh377.sht
2006/1/5 [Reference/Religion] UID:41244 Activity:nil
1/5     Pat Robertson says God struck down Ariel Sharon for "dividing God's
        land"
        http://mediamatters.org/items/200601050004 (video clip)
2006/1/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:41245 Activity:kinda low
1/5     BTW, the O'Reilly vs. Krugman exchange did happen on Russert's show.  A
        conservative's analysis is that O'Reilly proved Krugman to be the liar.
        http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/kts200408090930.asp
        Full transcript of the exchange can be found:
        http://pkarchive.org/economy/TimRussert080704.html
        \_ Donald Luskin is not a useful data point on anything.
           \_ When I read it and the full transcript, his comments appeared to
              be on target.  So actually he is.  And you're simply wrong.
              \_ Bob Somerby's breakdown: http://dailyhowler.com/dh081004.shtml
                 Luskin only makes sense if you think O'Reilly is an honest
                 debater/knows what he's talking about.
                 \_ And here I thought we're keeping an open mind about things.
                    \_ About ideas.  Not liars.
              \_ It depends on what the meaning of "disastrous" is
        \_ I don't get his logic.
           O'Reilley says "Krugman said X in this book"
           Krugman says "I never said X in the book"
           This article then digs up a New York Times column where Krugman
           says X.  Um, weren't we talking about a book here? What does this
           prove exactly?
           \_ It depends on what the meaning of X is.
                \_ No it doesn't at all.  If I say "I never said X in this
                   book I wrote" it's not the same as saying "I never said X"
                   \_ Okay, please identify what X is.
                        \_ IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT X IS.
                           \_ unless, of course, in your "I don't get his
                              logic" post, you have incorrectly used X, X,
                              X, when it's really something like X, X, Y; or,
                              if you really wanted to get into it, the whole
                              exchange probably involves about 4-6 letters.
                           \_ Whether X matters depends on whether you care
                              about substance or form.  Let's try an
                              example.  Let's say Bush says in a radio address,
                              "I lied when I said I had intelligence about WMD
                              in Iraq."  Later, Kerry says, "Bush said in a
                              televised address he lied when he said he had
                              intelligence about WMD in Iraq".  Now, the Bush
                              supporters might say Kerry was wrong, and they
                              would be right, since Kerry said televised
                              address instead of radio.  But most people might
                              think that the mistake is trivial, and it's the
                              content of Bush's address that is of substance.
                              Who you think is wrong probably says more about
                              your politics than about the discussion.
                              \_ Normal people would say Kerry mispoke, he
                                 meant radio address, but otherwise, yes,
                                 Dubya did say he lied.
                                 The example does not fit the Krugman-O'Reilly
                                 exchange, though.
                                 \_ Perhaps this says more about your politics
                                    than about the discussion.  Screw where
                                    Krugman said it, but what is X?
                                 exchange, though.  This is the exchange:
                                 O'Reilly:  You said X.
                                 Krugman:   I did not say X.
                                 O'Reilly:  You said Y.
                                 Krugman:   "Nope." (probably on Y, but maybe
                                            X or some mishmash of the two)
                                 Luskin shows evidence that Krugman wrote Y in
                                 a column, when Krugman really wrote Z.
                                 X = deeper recession
                                 Y = disastrous for the economy
                                 Z = a major drag on the economy
                                 It matters not whether it's a newspaper column
                                 or book, because, like I said, normal people
                                 don't care.
                                 \_ Now, this is a different description than
                                    was given above (you introduced Z, which
                                    is new).  To keep using your variables,
                                    it seems that Y > X ~> Z.  Without exact
                                    quotes, I think it would be hard for me
                                    to figure out how how similar X is to Z.
                                    Do you have the exact quotes wrt X and Z?
                                    \_ Thanks for Z.  Do you have X too?
                                       \_ hey you two, rtfurl.
                                       \_ To find X, integrate Z wrt Y.
                                 \_ Actually Z was: "Aside from their cruelty
                                    and their adverse effect on the quality of
                                    life, these cuts will be a major drag on
                                    the national economy... it's clear that the
                                    administration's tax-cut obsession isn't
                                    just busting the budget; it's also
                                    indirectly destroying jobs by preventing
                                    any rational response to a weak economy."
                                    \_ yeah, the last part of Z about the
                                       destroying jobs does match with what
                                       Krugman was saying to O'Reilly:
                                       destroying jobs, not having "disastrous"
                                       effects or causing a "deeper recession"
                                    \_ yeah, the last part of Z does match
                                       with what Krugman was saying to
                                       O'Reilly:  destroying jobs, not having
                                       "disastrous" effects or causing a
                                       "deeper recession"
                                       My conclusion:  Krugman was right.
                                       O'Reilly and Donald Luskin are both
                                       wrong.  See X, Y, Z above.
        \_ From the Somerby URL:  why does this sound like soda motd?
           "O'REILLY: Hey, Mr. Propaganda, you ought to take and do your own
           research, pal, and stop taking the left-wing garbage and throwing it
           out there for the folks.
           KRUGMAN: What have I said that's false?
           O'REILLY: Do your own research!
           KRUGMAN: Come on."
        \_ Why does all this seem to me, as a person who is really neither
           involved nor interested, as really fucking petty and irrelevant?
           Somehow the phrase "get a life" springs to mind."  -John
2006/1/5-7 [Science/Electric, Computer/HW/CPU] UID:41246 Activity:nil
1/5     Intel releases pricing details for dual-core notebook Yonah CPUs,
        dual-core 1.66Ghz at $241:
        http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9584_22-6019832.html?tag=nl.e589
        You lose in power consumption / battery life:
        http://news.com.com/Yonah+to+suck+up+more+power/2100-1006_3-5893308.html
2006/1/5-7 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41247 Activity:nil
1/5     http://www.crooksandliars.com/2006/01/05.html#a6586
        Former National Mine Academy director blames Bush administration's lax
        policy on mine safety (leading to failure to close mine) for men's
        deaths
        "Hannity:  You want to turn this into a political thing ...
        Spadaro:  No, I'm telling you what the truth is."
        \_ We don't want to play the "blame game".  Let's move forward!
           \_ I thought we established that the miners died because Sharon
              divided God's land? Was it something else?
                \_ Let's move forward also means "let's make all the
                   regulations strictly voluntary because corporations always
                   do the right thing"
2006/1/5-7 [Finance/CC, Consumer/TV] UID:41248 Activity:nil
1/5     Planet of the Apes Complete TV Series, see "similar items"
        http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_id=1596594
        \_ No, seriously, wtf?
           \_ Oh darn someone updated the web site
              Everybody Loves Raymond, Friends, and SW Trilogy indeed.
        \_ did you find this yourself or did you read it somewhere?
           Article on this found:
        http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/01/06/financial/f032509S62.DTL
2006/1/5-9 [Uncategorized] UID:41249 Activity:nil
1/5     I wonder if the discards are collectible.  Maybe a trip to Haiti is
        in order.  http://www.slate.com/id/2133753
2006/1/5-9 [Computer/SW/OS/Windows] UID:41250 Activity:nil
1/5     Heh.  Combining the power of Windows CE, Me and NT we have...
        Windows CEMeNT!
        http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/5036/1165/1600/cement.0.jpg
        \_ That joke's--what--4? 5 years old?
           \_ thanks for posting; missed that 4 or 5 years ago.
2006/1/5-9 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41251 Activity:nil
1/5     Wow, this is the first time in a long time (years?) I've seen the U.S.
        admit to a bombing error.  Previously it was always, "known safe house"
        "insurgents making false statements about civilian deaths" etc.
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/01/05/iraq.target/index.html
        \_ So what?  USA never get punished for it.  US military can do
           everything they want, and call it "mistake." and continue to
           do what they are doing.
        \_ Ever consider the possibility that this is the first bombing error
           in years?  I'm sure not.
2006/1/5-9 [Computer/SW/Mail] UID:41252 Activity:nil
1/5     I have done it before, but now it doesn't seem to work anymore.
        any PINE users out there?  How to I mark a message unread?  Searching
        the web turn up the following sequence:" *,n ", but that doesn't
        seem to work here.
        \_ * N works for me...
        \_ (S)etup, (C)onfig, make sure that "enable-flag-cmd" is set -crebbs
           (or just include "enable-flag-cmd" in your feature list in .pinerc)
           \_ thank you very much, someone must have changed my setting. Come
              to think of it, it always feel like there was someone snooping
              in my account.  is there any good way to find out
2006/1/5-9 [Recreation/Computer/Games, Recreation/Sports, Recreation/Media] UID:41253 Activity:nil
1/5     I just found out about the underground flash phenomenon.   Here's
        a few of my favs, skewed to video game heads:
        SFII vs MK3: http://tinyurl.com/7wb2f
        Scorpion Addicted to Mortal Kombat: http://tinyurl.com/c9qd4
        Star Wars Gangsta Rap: http://tinyurl.com/8ogyy
        \_ welcome to the 21st century
2006/1/5-9 [Reference/Religion] UID:41254 Activity:kinda low
1/5     How can people be this stupid?
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/01/05/robertson.sharon/index.html
        \_ With the "woe unto" comment, one could interpret Robertson as
           wishing strokes, death etc. on these people. Lovely.
           \_ No, you couldn't unless you have no context and are an idiot.
        \_ Yeah, we've done that below.
        \_ here is my question of the day.  according to my limited knowledge,
           the size of the Promised Land is about 4 times of what Israel is
           today.  Does Robertson support invation of Syria, and rest of
           neighboring Arab nations to restore the rest of the Promised Land?
           \_ Umm... I wouldn't put it past him.
              \_ Me neither.  Which would put Pat Robertson right up there
                 with the prez of Iran and bin Laden, as people who don't see
                 a problem killing & taking land away from people of the other
                 'evil' religion(s).
                 \_ you gotta becareful here.  Taking land away from infidels
                    are fundamental building block of USA and Israel.
                    \_ Sorry to pop your cherry, son -- but most countries
                       gained land in wars with other countries or people.
                       (even China).  There's this thing that's commonly
                       referred to as 'History'.  People even write books
                       about it.  Maybe someone here will even recommend a
                       good book about this 'History'.
                       \_ no one can match the scale of what USA have done,
                          though.
                       \_ Garbage!  The Great Chinese Civilization grew
                          mostly from the voluntary adoption of our superior
                          culture and way of life by people around us
                          who later voluluntarily decided to become part of
                          us.  When our great admiral Cheng Ho (aka Zheng
                          He), he did not invade anyone even though he had
                          an overwhelming military advantage.  This is
                          unlike the western pirates who lusted for gold
                          He) sailed the seven seas, he did not invade
                          anyone even though he had overwhelming
                          military advantages.  This is unlike the
                          western pirates who lusted for gold
                          and riches, and slaves.  Please do not project
                          the pirate mentality of your evil ancestors onto
                          the Great Chinese Civilization.
                          the Great Chinese Civilization.  We are not the
                          same as you evil monkeys.     -gcc
                    \_ US yes, but Israel..... I mean, they gained
                       land in wars against other countries.  Whereas the
                       US just decimated the Indians almost to the point
                       of extermination.
                       \_ I am talking about what happened in 1948, not
                          1967.
           \_ It's pretty much best not to listen to Robertson. -emarkp
              \_ ...or anyone else who quotes the ugly sections of the Bible.
        \_ Christians do seem to be turning against him:
           http://tammybruce.com/archives/2006/01/pat_robertson_i.php
           http://wingercomics.com/blog/?p=39
2006/1/5 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:41255 Activity:nil 50%like:41259
1/5     How long until SED monitors will be available?
2006/1/5-9 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:41256 Activity:nil
1/5     Falling Bush on Bubbles:
        http://www.planetdan.net/pics/misc/georgie.htm   -scottyg
        \_ Strangely, this is much less difficult for me to watch than the
           original falling woman/mannequin.
        \_ scottyg, can I have the .fla for this? --erikred
          \_Not my work...just passing on the link cuz I thought it was
            funny. -scottyg
2006/1/5-9 [Uncategorized] UID:41257 Activity:nil
1/5     Anyone have any ins at HP, or know how I can [legally] get ahold of a
        a good plotter for REALLY cheap?  I'm specifically looking for a
        DesignJet that takes at least 42in media and is relatively new, if not
        brand new (we are sick of sinking money into used plotters).  Please
        contact me directly. - jvarga
        \_ btw, I'm calling in all those favors people were offering me a few
           months ago!  I really need to get ahold of a good plotter asap.
           Destination is a non-profit organization. - jvarga
2006/1/5-9 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:41259 Activity:nil 50%like:41255
1/5     Any idea when SED monitors might hit the market?
        \_ From the first google hit article about SED monitors:
           "UPdate 10/19/05:The first monitors of this type might be released
           by Toshiba in 2007. Canon speaks of computer monitors end of 2006,
           early 2007."  --dbushong
2017/09/22 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/22    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:January:05 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>