1/9     French Maids: How to Podcast
        http://www.frenchmaidtv.com

1/9     Do cops get bonuses from writing tickets? Does the CHP get
        revenue from writing tickets?
        \_ what'd you get a ticket for? speeding? running a stop sign?
        \_ I would guess that most departments don't give bonuses.  -POC

1/9     Has anyone used 32" TV LCDs as monitors? How does it look?
        \_Check http://www.avsforum.com for some answers.  -ax

1/9     A million little lies
        http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0104061jamesfrey1.html

1/9     Total Iraq war costs estimated to be $2 Trillion
        I hope you warmongers feel like you got your money worth:
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060110/ts_nm/iraq_cost_dc
        \_ I'd delete this post not because I don't agree with you,
           but because you're going to cause jblack to retaliate by
           polluting motd with massive freep drivels
        \_ That comes out to ~$77k per Iraqi.  Not too bad in my "The Price
           of Freedom According to Warmongers" guide book.  What price do
           *you* put on the freedom of a single person?
           \_ how many civilians killed by US bombing again?
           \_ You can pay it then. Don't make me do it...
           \_ Umm, you call civil war freedom?
              \_ Let us know when there's a civil war and we'll talk.  I
                 certainly call the present situation a vast improvement over
                 the Saddam years by any measure, unless you were a Baathist
                 thug during that time period.
                 \_ What does it matter what you think?  You don't live there.
                    I find it amazing that Americans feel they can say whether Iraqis
                    are better off or not.
                 \_ If you didn't notice 190 people were blown up last
                    weekend.  It is a civil war.  Civil wars aren't always
                    two armies shooting tanks at each other.
                    \_ Wow, a tank shooting cannon?  Are the tanks crewed when
                       they get fired?  Kind of gives a whole new meaning to
                       the notion of "terminally guided munitions".
                       \_ Think really large trebuchet.
                    \_ Insurgency, not civil war.  Very distinct concepts here.
                       \_ it's like northern ireland except with a lot more
                          bombs plus beheadings and suicide bombings
                          \_ Right.  An insurgency.
                          \_ Right.  An insurgency.  Use a dictionary, kid.
                    \_ That's not a civil war.  Nothing like it.  Back to
                       KOS for you.
                    \_ Definition of "civil war": http://csua.org/u/ekk
                       Definition of "war": http://csua.org/u/ekl
                       So, how exactly is this not a civil war?
                       \_ "civil war" cf.'s "war"
                          "war - 1 a (1) a state of usually open and declared
                          armed hostile conflict between states or nations"
                          (yes, I know defn 2 is much more general, but you
                          often use that sense in, "my sister and I are having
                          a war!")
                          So, are the Sunnis+terrorists:  open (half/half),
                          declared conflict (yes on the terrorists, half/half
                          on the Sunnis), and between states/nations
                          (not really in a strict sense).
                          On the other side, I think http://m-w.com defn 1a(1) of
                          "war" is faulty -- the American Heritage dictionary
                          also includes "between ... parties", and I think
                          that's correct.
                          Also, it is 100% correct to say that the
                          insurgency has strong elements of a civil war --
                          it is an armed conflict between mostly Sunnis
                          and mostly Shiites/Kurds, and they're all Iraqi
                          citizens. -someone else
              \_ huh?  it's not a civil war.  stupid.  it's a war of
                 liberation to kick out American Big Oil imperialists.
                 I mean WTF are these people who live thousands of miles
                 away doing in my country, setting up torture camps,
                 shooting civilians, destroying cities, etc.?  They
                 have proven to be totally incompetent in running the
                 country.  In any case, nobody asked them to come.
                 yea, Saddam is a bad dude, but this is much worse.
                 These foreign invaders have no clue how to run the
                 country.
           \_ Let's see, unemployment still running at 35%+, Iraqi murder
              rate 4X what it was under Saddam Hussein, still no electricity
              for over half the day in most of the country, oil production
              actually *down* from what it was before the war, women forced back
              into wearing scarves and the veil... how is this all an
              improvement?
              \_ Under Saddam, the south got water and electricity or not
                 when Saddam felt like it using basic resources as a stick
                 to keep the Shia in line.  Under Saddam, ~5000 people/month
                 were killed by the government.  Under Saddam, the oil money
                 \_ that is due to UN saction, not Saddam's fault per se.
                 went straight into Saddam's pockets.  Under Saddam, women (of
                 the wrong tribe or political affiliation) were sent to rape
                 camps.  Yeah, those were the days!  Really, this whole Saddam
                 \_ Women enjoys much more rights and freedom under Saddam's
                    Iraq than most of the Arab nations... and it is getting
                    worse as Shiit dominate the politics
                    \_ Not to mention that we have brought back the torture
                       chambers and rape rooms. Or perhaps it is more accurate
                       to say they never went away, just the names of the
                       people running them changed.
                 trial thing is such a huge mistake.  We should not only let
                 him go, but reinstate him because he ran the country so much
                 better.  Truly you have found the answer to the ongoing
                 problems across the entire Middle East: install a strong man
                 bastard, call him "our bastard" and ignore everything as
                 long as the oil keeps flowing.  I love you cold war warrior
                 types who are willing to sacrifice any number of people in
                 the name of "stability".  Go form a political group and call
                 yourselves "Stability By Any Means Necessary".  It fits.
                 \_ I will blame the gwbush administration for incredibly weak planning
                    and thinking that they would be able to control a tribal society
                    that has been fighting for hundreds of years, with a few
                    Marines and KBR contractors.
                 \_ "you cold warrior types"?  It's the same damn guys, at
                    least at the leadership level.  I never thought the
                    "our bastard" doctrine was acceptable, which is part
                    of why I don't trust a guy like Rumsfeld to have supposedly
                    suddenly had a change of heart.  I actually supported the
                    idea of invading Iraq, but I don't trust anyone in this
                    administration to do it, now that Powell's gone, and
                    my mistrust is being shown to be well-placed by events
                    on the ground.
                 \_ wow!  you've been brainwashed pretty well by the
                    Bush propaganda machine.
                    \_ thank you for adding absolutely nothing and disputing
                       nothing posted above.  personal attack is not a good
                       way to make a point, not even on the motd, despite a
                       few people's opinion to the contrary.
                       \_ *yawn* Right, and a long unsubstantiated, vitriolic
                          rant contributes soooo much more.  Puh-leaze.
              \_ Sounds like France.
                 \_ Well, no.  In France, it is illegal to wear the hijab.
           \_ We're running a sale on Iraqis this week.  So that would be
              $3.95 + tax.
              \_ Whoa! Really?  You mean we could've done the whole thing for
                 only $100MM if we'd waited a few years?  I feel really
                 stupid now.  --former blood thirsty oil drenched warmonger
                 \_ Man, you should have been a Necromonger -- then you'd get
                    to keep what you kill.

1/8     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
        \_ Some of us have a lot of cocktail & dinner parties.  -John
        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?
        \_ 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
                    \_ 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.
        \_ 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 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.

1/10    VMWare GSX is most similar to VMWare Workstation. GSX allows the
        console to be viewed remotely. GSX does require IIS to be installed
        to handle the web component on Windows, or apache on *nix. ESX is an
        OS unto itself... it runs on a modified Linux kernel, and all virtual
        machines use a different file format than Workstation / GSX. Also,
        installation and administration of VMs is always done via web browser
        or remote client, and not directly at the server's interface. The file
        system it uses is unique as well, called VMFS. All virtual machines
        must be created on a VMFS-formatted partition, and VMFS will not
        install on IDE drives in version 2.5 (never tested that in v2, so IDE
        drives may work, or may not). For more info see below:

http://www.techsoup.org/fb/index.cfm?fuseaction=forums.showSingleTopic&forum=2009&id=58530&cid=117&cg=searchterms&sg=vmware
        \_ Huh?  Is there a question here?  Why did you post this?
           --vmware employee
           \_ Your marketing dept. getting desperate.
           \_ Who cares, it's interesting.  -John
              \_ Interesting-- when German John features in shit eating porn.
                 Not Interesting-- when geeks participate in esoteric
                 tech discussions that will get outdated in 1 year and
                 will get outsourced to India sooner or later.
                 \_ That was yermom in a John mask.  And god forbid the
                    CSUA should host any tech discussions.  -John
                    \_ But there's nothing to discuss here.  The original
                       post is just statement of fact; there are no questions
                       to answer or any points to dispute.  As it is, it
                       seems like just an ad.
                       \_ No, it's a "hey, look at this, it's cool."  It is
                          interesting.  And something I normally wouldn't go
                          page through VMWare marketing crap to look for.
                          But hey, it's soda; don't like it?  Nuke!  -John
                          \_ What exactly is it so interesting about
                             something that no one uses or cares about
                             and will get obsolete soon anyways?
                                        -i hate computer science should
                                         have majored something else

1/10    http://www.apple.com/macbookpro
        So what happened to all those "G4 chips kick intel butt" folks?
        \_ 2 generations of cpus
           \_ They are also introducing a Intel iMac.  Does that mean the
              G5 will be phase out?  What I really want is a Intel MacMini.
              \                                                - !op
               \_ Yes! The G5 heats up your room nice and warm!
              \_ what is big deal about Mini?  I thought it was designed to
                 used up all the surplus G4 processors.
                 \_ It's an iMac, except no built-in monitor. What's not
                    to like?
                    \_ Except the iMacs can have beefier cpus that generate
                       more heat and non-laptop HD.  Last version of iMac had
                       G5 cpus.
        \_ yay. so happy i didn't buy a $1200 powerbook a few months ago.

1/10    What a great idea.  What a shame Risen decided to disclose another
        secret project that we can't use now:
        http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10755448/site/newsweek
        \_ If it's true it's a moronic idea.  Doesn't it assume the Iranians
           are complete idiots who can't read technical diagrams and fix
           flaws? What about if they take the designs, compare it to others
           from Pakistan, North Korea, Russia, etc.  I admit I don't know
           anything about the design of nuclear weaponry but if it's anything
           like designs of other things you can often glean a lot of tricks
           and details from looking at a complete set of specifications.
           \_ Actually, this is not a new idea, and it's not moronic. If you
              pass on to the other side research that you know is both secret
              and goes to a dead end, you can make them invest time and money
              in something that you know won't work. This is an extrapolation.
              \_ Ever seen Michael Frayn's play Copenhagen?

1/10    dim-- 19 floor high rise building in the middle of the city,
        starting price: $1.5 mil. All sold out before they're even
        finished: http://www.thecalifornianonwilshire.com    Here's a
        data point for you. All the 1 bdrm high-rise condos in this area
        start at $600K. Still think the city is full of poor people?
        \_ Or just go to Miami and drive up and down the coast.  All
           those condos.
        \_ Which city in "Still think the city is full of poor people?" are you
           talking about?
           \_ which city has a notable street called wilshire?
              \_ That's my point.  The "city" in the housing thread below
                 refers to SF.
                 refers to SF.  -- PP
                 \_ Someone who honestly does not know that there are more
                    rich people than poor in San Francisco is not worth having
                    a discussion with.
                    \_ Really?  Here's the household income breakdown
                       according to the 2000 Census:
                       $10K-            9.8%
                       $10K-$14.9K      5.0%
                       $15K-$24.9K      8.5%
                       $100K-$149.9K    13.2%
                       $150K-$199.9K    5.3%
                       $200K+           6.1%
                       What's your definition for rich and poor?  It's not
                       at all obvious to me there are more rich than poor
                       in San Francisco (I'm not sure $100K is really rich
                       here, but $25K is pretty damn poor).  You might also
                       see http://www.sfbg.com/News/34/34/34stat.html
                       \_ The median income for a household in the city
                          is $55,221, and the median income for a family
                          is $63,545 one of the highest in the United States
                          at 15th place overall and 3rd in a single large city.
                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco%2C_California
                          74k in poverty: http://tinyurl.com/a3ld4
                          By your own (outdated) numbers, 280k making
                          twice the national median, 100k making 3X.
                          By your own (outdated) numbers, 180k making
                          twice the national median, 82k making 3X.
                          \_ Sorry bub, but the median is a terrible measure
                             for the point you're trying to make (which, I
                             have to admit is pretty darned stupid).  Train
                             harder, grasshopper.
        \_ Yes, if the city is called thecalifornianonwilshire, then it has
           more rich people than poor.
        \_ Wilshire and a couple blocks east of Westwood Blvd is a prime
           location, not like the overpriced downtown lofts
           -long-time L.A. resident
           more rich people than poor.  If you are living in the County of
           Los Angeles, then ~35% of the households make less than $30K and
           ~18% make more than $100K.  Now, I'm guessing most of the $100K
           income types are not buying those $1.5M condos.  ~10% make $150K
           or more.  Maybe that's the target demographic.
        \_ Yes, the city is full of poor people. Then again, so is the
           country. If anything, this data point proves my point, which is
           that the quality of living in the city sucks unless you are a
           multi-millionaire. $600K for a one bedroom condo?! Do you want
           to lookup how much a house with a backyard, a FDR, and a family
           room costs in the same area? Which do more people desire based
           on that?
           \_ yes I looked up. All the single family homes in the area
              start at $1.25 mil. This is an area south of Belair, west
              of Beverely Hills, and east of Brentwood. By the way
              they're all old houses that were built in the 30s and 40s,
              and even the $1.25 mil homes look crappy.
           \_ There are some of us who don't want a huge house, and want the
              things you can only get by living in the city.  Why can't you
              just accept this?  I'm not the person attacking the 'burbs or
              the people that live in them, by the way.
              \_ Which is why this whole "debate" is retarded.  It seems to me
                 that part of the point of having money is doing whatever the
                 hell you want.  For some people that's 10 acres of giant
                 plastic gazebos, and for some people that's a penthouse
                 overlooking central park--but the implication that having
                 money somehow implies a specific lifestyle and that the
                 money somehow implies a specifici lifestyle and that the
                 only reason you'd do anything different is that you can't
                 afford it is just dumb.
              \_ I have no problem accepting that people have different
                 preferences. What I have a problem with is the idea that
                 'rich' people prefer the city and that 'suburban' people
                 are all putzes with no sense. However, whether you live
                 in the city or the suburbs, a single family residence is
                 more attractive to more people than a condo or apartment
                 is. Key here: more != all.
                 \_ Uh, you are twisting things 100% from the original
                    assestions that started the debate. Some suburbanite
                    claimed that no one preferred high density living
                    and that everyone wanted a large suburban home.
                    Remember this?
                    \_ Can you read? Most people prefer a SFR to
                       high-density housing, even in the cities. You can
                       confirm this by comparing relative prices.
          "It 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."

1/10    Yet again, the rest of the world smirks:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4589072.stm  -John
        \_ Most of that doesn't really seem smirkworthy to me.  I mean, it's
           silly _now_ because the industry is just starting up, but these just
           seem like practical extensions of air travel-based rules, which will
           make sense when/if space tourism "takes off"  --dbushong
           \_ Dave, the only reason the FAA is able to enforce moronic "take
              off your shoes" rules and no-fly lists (which really don't
              do anything) is because either flights originate/terminate in
              the US, or because in a more extended manner they have leverage
              over airlines that want to use US airports at all.  This bit
              of "news" is representative of a particular kind of arrogance
              which implies that the US has jurisdiction over stuff it..well..
              you get the idea.  If they were just good ideas and security
              recommendations, or an attempt to help the industry establish
              best practices, that'd be different; as it is, I do not credit
              the FAA (or any government TLA for that matter) with this sort
              of altruism.  -John
              \_ "The suggestions will affect Sir Richard Branson's enterprise
                  which aims to launch people into space this decade."  ...which
                  is based out of NM, which is within the FAA's jurisdiction,
                  right?  I was under the impression they were trying to
                  regulate the US space business, not the world's.
                  \_ Yeah, that's under the military's jurisdiction.
                  \_ Note that the article does not specify whether they
                     are going after US-based companies only.  However,
                     point taken.  -John

1/10    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/10/international/10cnd-iran.html
        Iran about to cross the "red line", breaking seals and announcing they
        will introduce uranium gas ino a research centrifuge.  According to an
        IAEA official, if Iran uses that centrifuge, the pilot research would
        allow Iranian scientists "to acquire the knowledge and the ability" to
        do enrichment at any level.
        (The previous breaking of seals was for uranium conversion, which was
        uranium ore -> uranium gas, which is relatively low-tech.)
        My prediction is that they'll let the centrifuge sit unsealed, but
        won't actually spin it with uranium gas inside.  If they do ... this
        would be their "all-in" bet.  This latest move is a big raise, to
        continue that analogy.
        \_ They already crossed the line.
           http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/10/D8F1T2NO3.html
           \_ It is one red line to many people to break those seals, I agree,
              and the West is acting hella pissed off ... but in my book, the
              real red line is actually spinning a (research) centrifuge with
              uranium gas, at which point the West+Russia will *be* more hella
              pissed off than acting that way.
        \_ Iran is doing the best it can to get the EU and the US on the same
        key for a change. They just might succeed.

1/10    "I ask all Americans to hold their elected leaders to account and
        demanda debate that brings credit to our democracy, not comfort to our
        adversaries." -GW Bush (Jan 10, 2006)
        See, Dubya's speechwriters are clearly freepers.

1/10    http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/01/10/D8F1LRCO5.html
        "Migrants, regardless of their migratory status, should not be treated
        like criminals"
        So if people break immigration laws, they're not criminals?
        \_ If the person writing that quote doesn't believe that they're just
           laws then, no, to them they are not criminals and shouldn't be
           treated as such.
        \_ Not all violations of the law are subject to criminal penalties.
           If you break the building code by putting in a deck w/o a permit
           are you a criminal?
           One can imagine a system where an immigrant is subject to a purely
           civil deportation system.
           \_ I see.  So you're parsing the word "criminal" to mean the
              criminal part of the penal code, vs. the civil part.  Okay.
              Yeah.  What's the case of illegal immigration right now?  Is
              that a civil violation or a criminal one.  Shut yer pie hole
              \_ I agree that many violations of the immigration code
                 are criminal, but not every violation is criminal.
                 Some, such as overstaying a NAFTA guest worker visa
                 may be treated as a civil offense, not even subject
                 to deportation.
                 Furthermore, my point is related to the speaker's
                 idea of what the law ought to be, not what it is.
                 The person who made that statement may feel that
                 it is never permissible to use criminal law to
                 punish immigration violations. There is nothing
                 inherently invalid with that idea, regardless of
                 whether it reflects currently law.
                 \_ How would you apply your logic to the sentence "Child
                    molesters should not be treated like criminals"?
                    \_ It depends on what you accept as the basis
                       for criminal punishment. One theory holds
                       that criminal punishment is appropriate
                       only in cases where the victim is one or
                       more actual individuals (as opposed to
                       society in general). If we accept this as
                       the basis for criminal punishment, then
                       we find that while child molest should
                       be punished by criminal law, immigration
                       violation should not.
                       only in cases where the victim is a person
                       (as opposed to society in general).
                       If one accepts this view as the basis for
                       criminal punishment, then we find that
                       while child molest should be punished by
                       criminal law, immigration violation should
                       not.
                       [ I am not saying this view is correct, I
                         am suggesting that it can be logically
                         self consistent. ]
        \_ This sounds like a hopelessly out of context (or out of reason)
           soundbite. A much more well-reasoned statement might have been,
           "Migrants, regardless of their migratory status, should not be
            be treated like violent repeat offenders, drug dealers, or
            terrorists, unless they're guilty of those crimes, too."
           \_ You're reading your own bias into the quote.  The Latin countries
              are asking for a guest worker program.  Guest worker programs
              makes migrant work legal.  By their proposed solution you see
              the main issue is the illegal status of migrant workers (hence
              "criminal"), and not the intensity of their treatment given
              they're illegal (hence not "violent criminal" or some such
              variant).
              \_ On a related note, I don't yet see the problem with a
                 migrant worker system.  To me, the biggest problem with
                 illegal immigration is that there's no way to control it.
                 Illegal immigrant violent criminals are a particular pain
                 in the rear.  It seems reasonable to work on both
                 tighter controls and a migrant worker system.

1/10    Polaris is a 3 star cluster:
        http://hubblesite.org/newscenter/newsdesk/archive/releases/2006/02/full

1/10    bloggers waiting for > $1 trillion in ARMs to adjust in 2007
        http://csua.org/u/ekr
        http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/16/realestate/16arm.html
        2005 $   80 billion
        2006 $  335 billion
        2007 $1,200 billion
        \_ Yes but if deficit and inflation go up by 100X, then none
           of it will matter. Oh, nevermind.
        \_ Just refi after your house goes up 40% after a year! That's gonna
           keep happening forever!

1/10    Sorry for the lame Debian Q. I'm running Ubuntu 5.10 distribution. I
        need certain packages from regular Debian Stable distro. I tried adding
        standard Debian distro URLs in /etc/apt/sources.list and did
        apt-get update to update the cache. However, it complains that the
        public key is not found. First of all, is it a bad idea to get
        Debian stable from Ubuntu stable, and secondly where can I set to
        by-pass key checking? Thanks.

1/10    China to sell $, buy Euro and Yen:
        http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/09/AR2006010901042_pf.html
        \_ This would be good for American workers, but may not be so good for
           people planning to buy a home.
        \_ Good.  We're entirely too comfortable with China.
                \_ And too comfortable with dollars actually buying something

1/10    I added X11 forwarding (said "yes") in /etc/ssh/ssh*_config
        and /etc/init.d/ssh restart. However, my win ssh client
        still says "server does not allow X11 forwarding." What's up?
        \_ Silly question (or maybe not).. Are you running an X server
           on your windows box?  Another silly question.  Is X installed
           on said server?  sshd needs to be able to find xauth, etc to
           do X forwarding.  Make sure they're in your path.
           \_ THANK YOU. After thinking about this, I simply did an
              apt-get install xbase-clients which then pulled in all
              the X dependencies. Afterwards, I can do X!!! Yay!
              Thank you so much. By the way how do I check which
              package depends on others? I have no idea what package
              I pulled in.
              \_ rpm -q --requires xbase-clients   -tom

1/10    Ah-nold riding motorcycle without a license
        http://csua.org/u/el3 (Yahoo! News)
        \_ "Schwarzenegger spokeswoman Margita Thompson, acting on initial
           information Sunday, said the governor's Class C driver's license
           allowed him to ride the motorcycle with its sidecar attached. His
           12-year-old son, Patrick, who was riding in a sidecar, was unhurt."
        \_ Who's that other politician in another state who ran a stop sign at
           above freeway speed and killed someone, and then was found not
           guilty of manslaughter?
           \_ http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/01/22/janklow.sentencing
              He was found guilty, but only served 100 days.
              \_ Only 100 days for manslughter for a chronic speeder who ran
                 the stop sign at 70mph.  What justice.

1/10    To the person who asked about Auto Assualt a few weeks back, http://mmorpg.com
        is giving away 6000 beta keys. http://www.mmorpg.com/aa_betaweekend.cfm

1/10    China to sell $, buy Euro and Yen:
        http://tinyurl.com/8tt7a        tiny URLed
        \_ This would be good for American workers, but may not be so good for
           people planning to buy a home.
        \_ Good.  We're entirely too comfortable with China.
                \_ And too comfortable with dollars actually buying something
           \_ It's more like you are too comfortable with deficit spending.