Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:January:30 Monday <Sunday, Tuesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2006/1/30-2/2 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:41596 Activity:nil
1/30    Hey did something happen to  That site rocks.
        \_ I had half a page of vitriol qued up in my mind before I realized
           that your link has nothing to do with real estate speculation.
           \_ lafe, why do you hate free capitalism? people do what they
              do to maximize return, that's the spirit of our capitalism.
        \_ what did it do?
2006/1/30-2/1 [Computer/HW/Laptop] UID:41597 Activity:nil
1/30    Any suggestions for cleaning underneath a ThinkPad keyboard?  I've got
        to stop eating crackers over my laptop.
        \_ Flip, shake.
           \_ Yeah, only moderately effective.
              \_ You could open it but you'd probably be breaking the warrantee
                 and it might be a problem getting it back together properly.
                 I've seen some laptops that were easy to close back up and
                 others that were a mess of *very* short cables between the
                 2 halves.  YMMV.  I'd stick to flip/shake unless you're
                 missing key strokes.
        \_ I thought thinkpad keyboards are easy to pop off?
           \_ They are.  -tom
           \_ Ah, the real answer! -op
        \_ For Dell Latitude notebooks there are full instructions for
           removing/reinstalling the keyboard, and eBay sells a whole bunch
           of kb's.  I suggest you google for a Thinkpad maintenance manual
           (online HTML or downloadable PDF) for your model.
           I don't believe doing something like this for Dell notebooks will
           invalidate the warranty (within limits), not sure about Thinkpads.
        \_ Compressed air keyboard cleaning bottle?  -John
        \_ For desktop keyboards you can pop individual keys and then vacuum.
           Don't know about ThinkPad.
           \_ Yes, but they are more delicate and prone to damage. --Jon
2006/1/30-2/2 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:41598 Activity:nil
1/30    Is there a standards association in Taiwan that's similar to ANSI, JSA
        and ISO?  I'm trying to look up some standards.  Thanks.
        \_ After China globalizes and dominates all the markets that Taiwan
           used to dominate (motherboard, cheap goods, etc), Taiwan the
           island will be completely irrelevant and the US government will
           no longer give a damn about Taiwan.
           \_ I agree, but right now I'm just trying to look up the official
              dimensions of the paper sizes 8K and 16K.  Supposedly these are
              Taiwan paper sizes.  I think they are also called 8-Kai and
              16-Kai, but I'm not sure.  -- OP
        \_ Taiwan mosly use US standards. For size of paper, they use
           (I think) European standard.  A3, A4, B3, B4, etc.  the old standard
           has became irrelevant due to the fact that most of the paper making
           machinaries are imported from abroad.
           \_ So are 8K and 16K really Taiwan standards?  I'm not even sure.
              Thx.  -- OP
              \_ It's a Chinese expression.  The original definition of 8-kai
                 means a piece of paper is being cutted into eight pieces,
                 hence, bigger than a paper which is being cutted into 16
                 pieces (16-kai).  Once upon a time there was a standard on
                 how big a sheet (1-kai) paper is.  I am not sure how relevant
                 it is now.
2006/1/30-2/1 [Computer/HW/Scanner] UID:41599 Activity:low
1/30    We have a lot of photos (4x6 and 5x7) that we'd like to scan and
        turn them into jpeg files.  We have misplaced the negatives for most
        of them.  What's the fastest way of doing this other than scanning
        with a flat bed scanner one photo at a time?   Are there scanners
        that you can feed a stack of 4x6s or 5x7s and it'll scan them
        automatically?  Thanks.
        \_ there are lots of good scanner/feeder systems out there, and
           the good ones are over $500. If you want to scan negatives,
           1200x1200 is barely sufficient, 2400x2400 is decent, but
           4000x4000 is much better. Check out the Nikon feeder systems,
           that's what professionals use. If $800 is too much for you
           despite the fact that you already have a milk-cow job and a
           moonlight real-estate job, you can always pay someone else
           to do it for a nominal fee.
        \_ Quit being a cheap chink and pay someone to do it.
        \_ Yes, there are feeder systems, but they tend to be a bit pricey.
           When I had a bunch to do, I just sort of set up a production line
           and put 4 on the bed at a time, then cut them up later.
           \_ My old flatbed scanner had a feeder on it. It wasn't
              particularly expensive, but I guess expense is relative.
2006/1/30-2/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:41600 Activity:low
1/30    Filibuster killed, Alito scheduled for confirmation at 11 EST tomorrow
        "All Your Cloture Vote Are Belong To Us"
        \_ All your fetuses are belong to you
           \_ That's "potential humans", to you.  Remember, abstinence is
              murder, too!
              \_ are you pro-egg/sperm/zygote?
              \_ So is eating.
                 \_ Not if you only eat things that don't kill the plant/
                    \_ Like... sand?
                       \_ Like...fruit.
                          \_ now you're killing unhatched baby plants :(
                             \_ fruit isn't a baby plant, seeds are.
2006/1/30-2/2 [Computer/Companies/Google] UID:41601 Activity:low
1/30    In other news, GOOG super-engineers have fixed the case-sensitivity
        censoring feature bug at
        \_ Don't be evil unless your shareholders want more, in
           which case you do whatever it is necessary to make the
           shareholders happy.                  -capitalism rules
        \_ Don't be evil, unless it's for China.
           \- dont you think all this picking on google is a bit of a
              double standard? i mean yahoo released the email info for
              a chinese person who has since been jailed, there are plenty
              of people neterting into mfgring agreements with sketchy
              of people enterting into mfgring agreements with sketchy
              people etc. i realize google sort of set itself up with the
              "dont be evil" bit but i'm not sure what you would rather
              have then do in this case. like tivo i guess is ok with
              hardware hacking to put in bigger drives but dont want to
              to hack the service side of things ... that seems reasonable.
              as opposed to say sony in the aibohack case etc.
              \_ Yes, that's precisely the issue.  Google says "don't be evil"
                 and then the go and be evil.  Hypocrites have been criticized
                 for a long time.
                 \_ google is following the local law.  in that regard, it's
                    not google's problem, no?
              \_ Google is under no obligation to expand into China.  It is
                 under an obligation not to do evil, if its motto is "Don't
                 be evil".  Necesse est eam, non est vivam.
                 \_ So is it more evil to have no google or to have a
                    censored google?  Seriously.
                    \_ It's better for me to have a semi-evil google over an
                       amoral google.  It is better for google to be moral
                       evil google.  It is better for google to be non-evil
                       rather than semi-evil, if its stated goal is not to
                       be evil.
                    \_ It's evil to cooperate with a government that crushes
                       human rights, yes.
           \_ or how about:  "don't be that evil", or "... if you can help it"
              Or Sergey could have just come out with:
              "Well, we decided to be evil in this case."
           \_ Tools are never inherently evil. "Every tool is a weapon if
              hold it right."
              \- doesnt it seem odd to be holding a company to a higher
                 standard than say your govt?
                 \_ I normally don't.  In google's case they asked to be
                    held to a higher standard.  I am just being obliging.
                 \_ I normally don't.  In fact, I prefer my companies profit-
                    maximizing (hence at least somewhat evil).  In google's
                    case they asked to be held to a higher standard.  I am
                    just being obliging.
                    \- i think this black and white view and overreading the
                       "dont be evil" is just silly.
                       \_ They made out quite well with the "do no evil" thing
                          until it was inconvenient.  As soon as it looked
                          like it was going to cost them money, they dropped
                          it like an old bag.  People hate hypocrites.  At
                          least Microsoft, Yahoo, Cisco, etc, never made any
                          obnoxious claims to be doing anything other than
                          making as much cash as possible with no moral
                          qualms.  People hate hypocrites.  And I believe now
                          is a good time to remind you that people hate
                          hypocrites.  Has anyone mentioned lately how much
                          people hate hypocrites?  --People Hating Hypocrites
2006/1/30-2/2 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:41602 Activity:kinda low
1/30    What's a good way to archive hundreds of GB, or even TB, of data?
        Tape seems obvious, but it is not random access. Hard drives are
        cheap, but I fear reliability issues, even with RAID. We're
        talking about archiving data for decades. Is the best strategy
        to write to tape *and* to hard drives, only going back to tape
        in the event of a disaster?
        \_ I just send an email to Chuck Norris, and he'll remember it forever.
        \_ Not that this is your situation, but this brings us back to a
           similar chat a few weeks ago about data retention: most of our data
           is crap and no one would miss it if it vanished.  If long term mass
           data storage was a real problem for more people there'd be a lot
           more effort going into a real solution usable by a larger number of
        \_ This is an ongoing problem, and not one with any "standard" solutions
           that I've seen.  The closest I've seen to common wisdom on this topic
           is: keep the data online, backed up, in multiple places, and keep
           moving it to new media as the old dies.  Not a lot of fun.
        \_ whoever solves this problem so that it is both convenient and
           cheap will become very rich.
        \_ Contact the Internet Archive.  They've solved the problem already.
           They did the work to figure out the lowest cost petabyte array, and
           I'm sure they'd be happy to work with you.  Here's the overview of
           their system: -emarkp
           \_ What do these guys do when their server room explodes?
              There must still be tapes or similar, right?
              \_ What if the earth explodes? I make sure to stow away backups
                 on each nasa mission.
                 \_ drink 3 beers, eat some peanuts, bring a towel, and don't
                    forget to feed the dog a cheese sandwich
                    \_ Is this a lame Hitchhiker's reference?
              \_ I assume it's redundant backup.  Call or email them! -emarkp
           \_ Bwahahahahahahahahahahah.  No, they haven't.  The good news is
              that they have a redundant backup on the other side of the world.
              The bad news is that the internet archive has incredibly high
              hardware failure rates since they usually get hand-me down
              hardware from Alexa (aka the for-profit half of the internet
              archive, a wholly owned subsidiary of, and both
              Alexa and the Internet Archive beat on their disks much harder
              than the typical usage disks are designed for.  Furthermore, the
              Internet Archive is woefully underfunded and, as a consequence,
              understaffed so they don't have the engineering man-hours needed
              to effectively work around the problems caused by their disks
              regularly taking a piss. -dans
        \_ What do people here do for their home backup needs? Hard drives?
           I don't understand the tape storage industry at all and optical
           media is kind of a joke.
           \_ I'm going with the faith based backup system.
              \_ Oh, nice. I guess, you know, if I lose some data, Yahweh
                 decided that wasn't good to have around.
                 \_ God helps those who help themselves.  Get a data backup
                    system if you don't want to lose data.  God supports
                    data backups.
        \_ This is a very important problem that very few people seem to be
           paying attention to.  For instance here are already gobs of NASA
           telemetry data from missions in the 20th century that are now
           effectively unreadable.  This is probably one of the few real
           advantages that truly analog storage mediums have over digital -
           a degraded analog signal is still readable long after the
           equivalent digital signal would be hopelessly lost.  One wonders
           what will happen to future historians trying to understand
           political decisions made by past governments when crucial
           information only passed through digital media.  The Long Now
           Foundation has projects exploring this issue, though I don't know
           how much practical success they have had:
           \_ NASA didn't really save a lot of the telemetry back then,
              only the products. However, there is data (on 9 track
              tape) going back to Voyager, Pioneer, and such. I am
              trying to address this issue for (my part of) NASA. In
              the past, tape (4mm, 8mm, 9 track) or optical disks were used,
              but today's missions generate quantities of data that would've
              been unthinkable in the 1970s. Additional problem: no one
              wants to pay (much) to do this stuff.
           \_ Digital data is still ultimately stored in an analog medium
              though, right? Besides, one can spend extra bits for redundancy
              and repair.
              \_ Sure, but once that analog medium degrades beyond the ability
                 of your error correction mechanism, the data is lost beyond
                 repair.  Pure analog mediums do not have this issue - although
                 a degraded signal will be very distorted, it will still
                 retain useful information.
                 \_ If it is distorted enough it won't be particularly useful.
                    With digital, you can recover the bit-perfect original,
                    even after severe degradation, dependent on how much
                    redundancy you budget. I don't see why "digital" is the
                    culprit. You could engrave "digital" bits into a chunk
                    of granite. Agreed though it's kind of an all or nothing
                    affair; you don't have much once it fails.
                    redundancy you budget. Agreed though you don't have the
                    gradual degradation... you have some "buffer" then it's
                    just gone. So you would have to have a huge parity to data
                    ratio to achieve similar longevity. On the other hand you
                    can keep copying the data to new media and never lose any
                    data which is impossible with analog (other than abstract
                    \_ All of what you say is true, but neither solution seems
                       practical from an everyday standpoint.  Most data
                       storage solutions maximize size and have little parity,
                       and there is usually little economic incentive to
                       keep preserving data in that manner.  Another huge
                       unresolved issue with digital data is format turnover.
                       I have a large collection of live recordings made with
                       a Sony DAT recorder in the 1990s.  Sony used a DAT
                       implementation that is notoriously difficult to read on
                       non-Sony machines.  With the market for DAT disappearing
                       and most of the major manufacturers discontinuing their
                       DAT machines, it will only be a matter of years before
                       my DAT recordings are unplayable on any easily
                       obtainable device - and before you mention the used
                       market, did I mention that DAT machines are prone to
                       failure and replacment components are hard to come by
                       due to the aforementioned death of the market for
                       DAT?  Since my Sony machine died, my only choice at
                       this point is to try to track down another one
                       that is still functional, and that includes a cable that
                       can adapt Sony's non-standard digital output to
                       SP/DIF - and then transfer hours of recordings by hand
                       to another format.  This is only an example, but it
                       illustrates the issue on a very small scale - multiply
                       this by a million times and you have some idea of what
                       future governments and corporations will be faced with.
                        \_ Speaking of data, much of our music, books and
                           movies will disappear not only because of the format
                           problem but because of the combination of silly
                           copyright periods and DRM that will make it very
                           difficult for future generations to recover any
                           of it.
                           \_ Our books aren't going anywhere.  Most of our
                              movies and music *should* be destroyed.
                              \_ HEIL GERMAN JOHN! HEIL!!!
                                 \_ Erm, bad troll, I wasn't even in the
                                    room!  -John
                              \_ Thank you Der Fuerher.
                       \_ Sounds like you're mostly getting screwed by using
                          nonstandard, proprietary stuff, not really digital
                          storage per se. If there was some specialized "AAT"
                          market and you did everything the same you'd have
                          similar problems. (Or if not proprietary, it's
                          relatively uncommon.)
2006/1/30-2/1 [Computer/SW/Database, Computer/SW/Apps] UID:41603 Activity:nil
1/30    What is an easy and free way to extract about 40 pages from a 180 page
        pdf document, so that I end up with one 40 page .pdf file and one
        140 page .pdf file?  I only need to do this once, so if there's
        some business that'll do this, I'd pay for it, but I don't want to
        buy software to only do it once.  I have Acrobat Professional, but I
        can't figure out how to use that to do this.
        \_ If you have Acrobat professional, the easiest way is top open the
           "Pages" pane, select the pages you want to extract, then right-click
           and choose "extract pages".  When that's done, right-click again and
           select "delete pages".
           \_ Wow, problem solved.  Thank you!!!
2006/1/30-2/1 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iran, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:41604 Activity:low
1/31    New Iran development, see bottom:
        - Iran breaks seals, announces resumption of enrichment research
                                             \_ You continue to fail to
                                                understand my point.  I did
                                                not say it was a "good" ruling.
        - West condemns Iran, support move to Security Council
        - Iran condemns West, threatens full-scale enrichment upon referral
        - Russia/China upset, but don't support move to Security Council
        - Russia highlights enrichment in Russia
        - ... Days tick away to IAEA board meeting ...
        - Iran says Russian enrichment plan "positive"
        Last Thu-Fri:
        - West (including U.S.) fully endorses Russian enrichment plan
        - Iran says of Russian plan "capacity of the program not sufficient ...
          can be revised to be more complete"
        - Iran allows IAEA visits to Lavizan military site
        - China and Russia sign on to statement with EU3 + U.S. saying
          they support reporting Iran to UN Security Council in a IAEA vote
          Thursday.  Sec Council will consider issue in March after formal
          IAEA report is delivered.
        \_ Your timeline would be useful except you drop key points.  Like
           you say Iran allows IAEA visits to Lavizan, but you leave out
           the part that it was a limited visit and they weren't allowed to
           see everything they wanted to see which is why they got referred
           to the Security Council.  If you're going to bother, do it right.
           \_ OP might have an agenda.
              \_ op does not have an agenda.  BTW, Iran is not getting sent
                 to the Sec Council because of Lavisan restrictions, even
                 if they were in place, which is why I didn't mention them
                 and also the fact that Lavisan has been "cleaned" ahead of
                 time.  If you want to jump to conclusions at least get it
                 right. -op
           \_ Restrictions on Lavizan (which had already been "cleaned") is
              not why Iran is getting referred to the Sec Council.  If you
              say someone is wrong, please try to get it right. -op
              \_ op does not have an agenda. -op
              \_ Convenient that you forget to mention it.  If I'm wrong, go
                 ahead and prove it.  It's your timeline.  Post a real time
                 line with all the facts or dont bother.  Anything less and
                 you might as well just keep it to a few lines of whatever
                 your agenda is and save us the false appearance of historical
                 honesty spread across 20+ lines.
                 \_ Let's keep this discussion very focused.
                    You said restrictions on Lavizan is why Iran is getting
                    referred to the Sec Council.  Do you still stand by this?
                    \_ Stop being clever.  Post your link.  I said what I
                       said.  Either way, your 'timeline' stated that Iran
                       allowed the IAEA to 'visit' which is only technically
                       correct.  They were not allowed to look at everything
                       they needed to look at which is not in your timeline
                       which makes your version of history make the Iranians
                       look accomodating when they're not.  Focus, indeed.
                       \_ All you needed to say was, "Yes."
                          I mentioned that Russia and China were going to
                          support a move to the Sec Council, and I kind of
                          assumed the reader would realize, "Oh, if China and
                          Russia are on-board (even with the fact that China
                          gets 14% of its oil from Iran), maybe Lavizan was
                          just a dishonest attempt to divide the other side"?
                          You know, I think I just should have written, "Yes,
                          you're absolutely right that Lavizan was a diversion,
                          but the reason why the case is being moved to the UN
                          is because of the resumption of enrichment research.
                          I omitted the Lavizan detail because I kind of
                          assumed the reader would recognize and even post
                          about this."  I should have written that instead of
                          getting all pissed off about a random sodan
                          attacking me.
           \_ Restrictions on Lavizan is not why Iran is getting referred
              to the Sec Council.  If you want to make a statement, make
              sure it's correct. -op
                          \_ Ok then.  I just want to see history kept straight
                             if history is being posted.  IMO, Lavizan wasn't
                             an easily dismissed detail; I think it was quite
                             important.  I'm happy to leave it at that.
                                -- random sodan
                             \_ Not really dismissed, but I kind of assumed
                                the reader would realize it was a diversion --
                                that Iran would not be giving genuinely helpful
                                info re Lavisan access, given China/Russia's
                                support for move to the UN.  I kind of just got
                                pissed off when the post came with an attack
                                on me too.
2006/1/30-2/1 [Politics/Domestic/911] UID:41605 Activity:nil
1/30    I'm not normally a knee-jerk Al Jazeera-basher, but they seem to be
        consistently _the_ way terrorists get their demands made public.  How
        do they justify making, for example, hostage-taking a viable practice?
        Refusing to air the tapes seems like a reasonable thing to do.  Why
        don't they?
        \_ It's newsworthy to their viewing public.
           \_ So would be a lot of immoral stuff.
        \_ Bashing Al Jazeera for being bastards wouldn't be knee jerk.  They
           are the propaganda arm of the extremist muslim movement.
           \_ Y'all kids are too young to remember, but the US media showed
              a lot of "propaganda" by various anti-government factions during
              the 60's and 70's, depending on how interesting it was. Why?
              Because it was happening in the US. Why does Al Jazeera show
              the tape? Because it affect their part of the world.
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:January:30 Monday <Sunday, Tuesday>