| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2006/3/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan] UID:42203 Activity:high |
3/13 Why do Reagan admirers say that the Soviet Union collapsed because
of Reagan's policies? I know he called SU the "evil empire" and
also started a Star Wars weapons program. What else did he do, and
how did these contribute to the SU's collapse?
\_ Those Reagan supporter think that by escalating the
arms race, we effectively bankrupted the Soviet much sooner than
we would of otherwise. Also, these guys were proud the fact that
we fought "Communism" on every 3rd world countries we can think of
by supporting dictatorships / islamic extremist all over, which also
bankrupted the Soviet (Congo, Afganistan, etc).
In their simple logic, "Communism" is "absolute evil" and everything
else is "lesser of the two evils." Notice the similar mentality
is in "war on terror" today (Saddam Hussin is evil and every one
else is a lesser of the two... now, it's Iran's turn :p)
\_ Everyone likes to take credit for SU's collapse but what really
brought SU down were Gorbachev's inept policies. He realized what he
had done after 1990 and tried to change his course of action but it
was too late by then. All other factors were just catalysts.
\_ Those Reagan supporter think that by escalating the arms race, we
effectively bankrupted the Soviet much sooner than we would of
\_ "would have"
otherwise. Also, these guys were proud the fact that we fought
"Communism" on every 3rd world countries we can think of by
supporting dictatorships / islamic extremist all over, which also
bankrupted the Soviet (Congo, Afganistan, etc). In their simple
logic, "Communism" is "absolute evil" and everything else is
"lesser of the two evils." Notice the similar mentality is in
"war on terror" today (Saddam Hussin is evil and every one else
is a lesser of the two... now, it's Iran's turn :p)
\_ Interestingly, a common fallacy of people seeking to debunk the
"Reagan bankrupted the Soviets" argument is assuming that all
governments/countries/armies/whatever against which the US
supported organizations that were thuggish, fascist and evil to
varying degrees, were actually any less worse than our own
stooges. -John
\_ it is true in Europe. But in Asia, Communism has much less
to do with Maxist Idealogy than Idealogy of self-determination
champaigoned by W.Wilsons, and FDR. Most of these "Communist"
were fighting European Imperial Power before WW2 ended.
If you are a Vietnamese and being brutally ruled by French
for past 100 years and suddently French says they really care
about human right and democracy. Would you believe it?
\_ And very often, the communists piggybacked conveniently on
the back of a nationalist movement--Viet Minh/CPVN is
a fantastic example of this. Note, I'm not saying the end
justifies the means or that any particular one of the
scumbags or dubious regimes the US supported during the
Cold War was excusable, just that you need to see this in
a bit of context; sometimes the alternative really was less
worse. -John
\_ I think if I lived in a repressive regime and got two choices
1) Live life like it is now, where there are large chunks
of things I can't say/do without a risk of dissapearing.
2) Live through a bloody civil/proxy civil war which
devistates the economy and civilian population (which
those kinds of wars have a real bad habit of doing) just
to live in another version of #1 one above.
I'd really prefer that the global super powers butted the
fuck out and let me live in relative peace.
\_ You said it, "powers". -John
\_ Huhwha?
\_ As in "powers" as opposed to "power". Plural. -John
\_ Ahh, yeah. That was intentional. It's just that
I care more when it is my country behaving badly.
\_ Hasn't the US been fighting proxy wars with the SU and its
stooges since the end of WW2? Korean War, Vietnam War, etc.?
\_ He basically forced them into an arms race which bankrupted
their country (and ours kind of...)
\_ But I thought the Soviet Union has been in an arms race with
the US since the end of WWII ?
\_ This is true. Reagan admirers say that Reagan upped the ante
and thereby sped up the economic collapse; detractors say
that he was merely the sitting pres. when the fruits of years
of arms race ripened. Cf. Bush I and fall of SU; Clinton and
economic prosperity in the late 90s; and Bush II and the
current economic crisis. The real story, of course, is a lot
more complex than who was sitting in the Oval Office. --e_red
\_ The scale of the arms race w/o a real war was significant
For example, Carter canned just about every program, gutted
the military - results were operation eagle claw.
\_ Reagan's support of Poland and his Zero Option undermined Soviet
power in Europe, which contributed significantly to the collapse
of the USSR. His personal relationship w/ Gorby is also another
factor that is also often overlooked. I agree w/ e_red that
Reagan cannot be given all the credit for the collapse of the
USSR, but he does deserve some credit.
WRT the current terrorist situation - I personally think that
Reagan would have used far better judgment than Bush2 in dealing
w/ this situation. I also doubt that he would have involved us
in Iraq, &c.
\_ Because he did so well at the marine barracks?
\_ Because he understood that you don't invade countries bigger
than a small island, and even then you only do it if you
have an exit strategy. -!pp, !reagan-admirer
\_ Like how we bailed after putting 500+ marines in a barracks
in a war zone and the gate guards didn't even have bullets.
\_ Because Reagan wasn't a reactionary. He had good advisers
who understood the value of a strong US-Europe relations
and were willing to negotiate and compromise on many things
in order to achieve their long term goals.
\_ Without getting deeply involved: there is a genral sense after
the Soviet invasion of Afganistan, US policy shifted from
Kennan's "containment" to "rollback". You can google/wiki
for those terms. --psb
\_ and it worked well has no ill consequences afterwards, no?
\_ it was a conflict, genius. if there was a perfect one shot
we-win! answer, it would've been done on day 1.
\_ you don't get it, don't you? Afganistan was much better
off under Communist rule. Women enjoys equal rights,
opium export was under control. After all these years,
don't you get it that "Communism" is not an absolute
evil?
\_ When exactly was this fantasy era for Afghanistan
when women had equal rights to men, there was an
economy based on something other than weapons and drugs
and the children played in rivers of chocolate?
\_ Afganistan is no paradise by any mean. But at least
during the Communist rule, women get education, they
can put lipsticks and high-heel on if they can
afford it. almost anyone who has slightest
knowledge about that part of the world would tell
you women was much much better off during the rules
of US-backed Mujahedeems.
\_ Still waiting to hear when this fantasy era of
goodness and chocolate rivers was. Are you
related to ChiCom troll? I think you are.
\_ from the perspective of economy, human rights,
etc. Communist Afganistan was much better off
than the Taliban US supported, not to mentioned
that Afgan became a heaven for terrorist after
the fall of the Socialist regime. Just admit
the policy and you are myopic and stupid.
\_ About 4000 years ago, during the height of
the Indus valley civilization.
\_ I don't think AfghanComTroll is talking about
4000 years ago.
\_ What do you call the fallacy of logic where one ignores
the faults of a system they prefer and justifies this
by pointing out problems with the current system? It
happens a lot on the motd |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Academia/GradSchool, Industry/Jobs] UID:42204 Activity:high |
3/13 Is it hard for new-grads (CS/EE) to get entry-level jobs in this
market?
\_ The type of jobs that I've been involved and have been interviewing
people for in the last 10 years require excellent coding skills
as well as thorough thought processes. The best coders are those
that come from decent schools and have decent GPAs (above 3.0).
Interestingly, some of the WORST programmers I've hired have
really high GPAs (above 3.8) or those that have PhDs. They are
smart and are good theorists, but they aren't necessarily
hard workers or good team players. They are brilliant in their
little own worlds, but have very little common sense and don't
embrace the work culture. Many of them are lazy or think that
existing code is trash ("I'm holier than thou") thus don't
contribute much except for their snide and occasionally
insightful comments; but talk is cheap, and they contribute
very little. They also tend to get bored and leave quickly, or
apply to MBAs/grad school and leave. I don't hire super smart
overachievers anymore. So don't worry about your GPA and such. Just
present yourself clearly and do well on the interview and you'll
be fine. -old alumni
\_ There is always a job for smart, likable people. The obnoxious
and stupid will have a hard time in any market. Right now, things
have/are switching back to the job seeker's side.
\_ What's the salary like for an average new-grad from an average
school? What about for someone with kinda good GPA, say 3.5,
from Cal? I don't mean the super-talented. Thanks.
\_ Entry-level jobs are some of the easiest to get. Who doesn't
like smart people for peanuts? Yes, they are sometimes
not immediately useful, but that doesn't seem to matter.
By the way, why do you think your GPA matters? With a 3.5
you could go to a good grad school, which is what you
might want to consider. That's a very good GPA and your
employer won't even care. They will most likely lump you
in with the guy who got a 3.0 at San Jose State. Grad schools
will care a lot more, if that's important to you.
\_ I heard that there are many really cool companies where
programming staff, HR, etc is dominated by alumni from top
CS schools and they generally do pay attention to where the
applicant is coming from. Of course, the university degree
is only a part of the equation.
\_ Sure, they look at where you went to school. However,
I doubt they care about your GPA. If they do, I
would question why they do. I once had an interview
where the woman asked me why I was so bad at math,
because I had B's in most of my upper division math
classes (I was a math major). I wanted to slap her
and say "If they were all A's I'd probably be
at Princeton right now and not applying for your
crummy job."
\_ Well, I generally filter new grads based on school
and then gpa. The school filter is mostly practical.
I'm more likely to find pearls amongst a pool of MIT
grads than among a pool of Bob's State U grads. Not
that there are noone excellent from Bob's; it's just
that they are rarer and take more effort to discover.
Also, interviewers tend to know more about the program
at the big noise schools (e.g., I know to be suitably
impressed by someone who did well in 6-111), and
that makes the resume screen more meaningful. At least
for me, GPA usually works as a high-pass filter, and
I don't stress too much over the difference once the
\_ Well, I generally filter new grads resumes based on
school and then gpa. The school filter is mostly
practical. I'm more likely to find pearls amongst a
pool of MIT grads than among a pool of Bob's State U
grads. Not that there are noone excellent from Bob's;
it's just that they are rarer and take more effort to
discover. Also, interviewers tend to know more about
the program at the big noise schools (e.g., I know to
be suitably impressed by someone who did well in 6.111),
and that makes the resume screen more meaningful. At
least for me, GPA usually works as a high-pass filter,
and I don't stress too much over the difference once the
GPA meets the reasonable criterion.
\_ Personally, I don't put my GPA on my resume, and never
have. It's a terrible filter, because it automatically
filters out smart, creative hackers that don't care about/
are bored by school. That may be okay for large software
companies writing, say, tax software. It's disasterous
for companies that want to be nimble, and hire the best.
I am in no way insinuating that all people with bad GPA's
are bright creative hackers, or that all people with good
GPA's are dumb automatons. Putting your gpa on your
resume implicitly supports this practice. Not putting it
on there may at least earn you a call back inquiring for it
which gives me the opportunity for me to explain why it's
not there. If a company still refuses to move forward
after that, I say ``Thank you very much for your time, but,
if you are unable to flex on this, I don't think I'd be a
good fit for your company culture.'' Incidentally, my GPA
sucked, but it has never gotten me filtered out of a job
once I reached the interview phase.
-dans Disclaimer: tom believes I am Paolo's stooge/tool.
If you're not with tom, you're against him, so
you may want to ignore the preceding, lest you
incur tom's wrath.
\_ Was it really necessary to stir this up again?
Why is it so important that you get the last
word in this argument?
\_ Who's stirring things up? I'm providing a
public service. In fact, when I have time,
I'm plan to write a utility that allows
people to add a disclaimer they write to
their own motd posts. Additionally, it
will allow everyone to write disclaimers
about others. All these disclaimers will
be viewable via the web, but only the most
popular (as chosen by majority vote) will
be added to entries on the motd. Of
course, it would be against policy to run
this tool automatically via cron or script,
so people will need to run it by hand. I
also plan to add an option to run it that
strips out disclaimers, so people who don't
like the utility can remove them. -dans
\_ Well, the utility does sound pretty neat,
but I was referring to your referencing
the Paolo Incident. Repeatedly spamming
motd with it doesn't seem to be resolving
anything. Oh well. n/m -mice
\_ Wow, you must really enjoy losing debates
badly, to bring it up again. -tom
\_ Seriously, you two ever graduate from
grade school? You bicker like a couple of
10 year olds. Grow up. -jrleek
\_ Tom, we already know that, insofar as this
matter is concerned, you have a completely
and utterly distorted view of reality.
Frankly, I have no interest in arguing it
with you any further as I am not your
psychotherapist. If I was, I would
recommend medication since you clearly
haven't responded to talk therapy. -dans
\_ Dude you are no better. Tom's view wasn't
"utterly distorted". He simply claims
Paolo violated policy, wasn't punished,
and lied about it. You have not shown
that to be wrong. You've just written
pages of allusions to secret concerns
about hate speech and stuff that is
frankly not a plausible explanation.
The fact you're bring it up again shows
maybe it hits you harder than you let on?
P.S. I don't know what the new grad market is like, but my
anecdotal sense is that the market is good and getting
better. If you know your stuff, you should have no
difficulty finding a job. The disclaimer applies to this
as well.
\_ There are real problems with hiring people with
good GPAs. Some of these are the same problems I
find with hiring people who are perhaps overeducated
for a particular job. They get bored easily and
bored turns into lazy, for example. They question
decisions made above them. In short, they are not
always good worker bees. You *can* have too many
chiefs and not enough Indians. Everyone wants to
feel important and everyone wants a challenging
job with opportunities for advancement, but no one
wants to work with someone who feels that they are
'doing time' until something better comes along
or they run off to grad school or whatever. Real
life story: I had a Caltech CS grad and a guy who
dropped out of a liberal arts college with the
equivalent of an AA. The latter guy was so much
better. He worked hard. He asked questions. He
put in extra hours. The Caltech guy had to be told
what to do and when he was done he showed no
initiative or desire for increased responsibility.
He saw work as a series of tasks to be completed.
He flirted with medical school and then grad school
and we all knew he'd be gone. We were glad when he
was. He was a smart guy who coasted along doing just
enough to get by. He was a terrible employee with
an inflated sense of self-worth and he was bad for
morale with his attitude. He really didn't care for
hard work and getting him to do mundane crap (as he
was, after all, entry level) was impossible. When
he did get a real task he'd suddenly take off skiing to
Mammoth with his friends, missing the deadline. In
short, a high GPA means you will probably do well
in grad school, not that you'll be a good employee.
\_ Nod. I've had this discussion with many people, and
I'm glad to see that support exists for this
viewpoint on the motd too. -dans
\_ Companies don't care about GPA now? When I graduated
in 1996, Intel would only talk to people who met the
"cut-off GPA", which was 3.5. AT&T's cut-off point
was 3.0, so was TI. And these requirements weren't
from individual hiring managers but from their HR
department.
\_ Yes, and it's stupid. So someone graduates from Cal
with a 3.4 and is rejected, while someone from, say,
Stanford (being generous) with a 3.5 is interviewed?
Stanford, while a good school, has incredible grade
inflation. Maybe they should hire based on SAT scores
or GRE scores or something. I think that would
actually be more meaningful than comparing GPAs
across programs and across universities - even as
a simple high-level filter.
P.S. I realize that a GPA shows a remarkably
different aptitude than a standardized test, but at
least the test scores can be compared reliably - at
least against others from the same testing year.
\_ I'm sure that many companies today do care about GPA,
and will continue to do so. I simply have no interest
working for a company that a) cares about GPA and b) is
so rigid wrt a) that a group or hiring manager can't get
them to ignore it. It's a personal choice, which, thus
far, has done well by me. -dans
\_ Removing the GPA from my resume was the fastest way
to turn getting no responses to lots of responses.
Turns out most people didn't really care, and it
only served to reduce offers. I'm sure it would
have helped if I had a 3.8 GPA. I still have an
almost 100% interview:job offer ratio.
\_ Last I talked to Google (2004), they kept
telling me over and over and over again that
they placed a lot of value on GPA. I
suspect they still care a lot about it now.
\_ Yes, this is true. Google places a lot of
value on GPA for new college grads. Which
means that, if you put your gpa on your
resume, it is below their threshold, and you
submit your resume cold (i.e. not through a
contact that works there), it is rejected
outright. They may reject what appears to be
a ncg app outright if it does not include a
gpa, in which case, if your gpa sucks, damned
if you do, damned if you don't. Or the
absence of a gpa may get it past auto filters
and into human hands, which is what you want.
Also, note that Adam Bosworth works for
google. He would utterly fail the gpa/degree
test. But he's a superstar so, he's not
necessarily pertinent to the discussion at
hand. -dans
\_ New grads? I had been working for 10
years when I interviewed with them. I
could only assume it was their polite
way of saying, "sorry, your GPA sucks".
Needless to say, they didn't extend me
an offer.
\_ Now that they're post-IPO why would
anyone want to work there anyway?
If you're a superstar making $1MM plus
stock a year to do whatever you want,
sure. But for the smart but otherwise
normal people out there? They have
nothing to offer anyone like that now.
Hours are long, pay is below average,
without a PhD you're going nowhere.
\_ Just what exactly do these PhDs
do at Google, anyway? You only
need a few good guys for
algorithm development. Isn't
Google basically a marketing/media
company at this point?
\_ You've been working for 10 years, and
you still include your GPA on your
resume? That looks kind of pathetic
and desparate. -dans
\_ 12 years now. I didn't include
my GPA. Google insisted on
knowing that information before
second round interviews.
\_ To me this is just another data point that
Google's hiring criteria are stupid. I know
people working at Google I'd never hire,
but they look good on paper. From what
I know of the hiring process they make
you feel like you should be lucky to be
working for them. Any company that does
that sucks. It would be interesting to
note when Google's hiring policies changed
and why. From an outsider point of view
they seem to be hiring 'superstars' more
for PR than to address actual needs, because
they can. I've seen this lead to disaster
when all of the rats desert the sinking
ship after they've cashed their options.
I'm not saying it will happen again, but
I think it's been shown time and again
that teams of superstars (whether sports,
entertainment, science, or business) tend
to underperform relative to the hype. I
view it as Google's way of creating a buzz to
fool sucker drones into thinking that they
have a better job than they do.
\_ Google has put a lot of effort into
recruiting phd physicists to work there,
with hiring ads in Physics Today etc.
As a phd physicist, this strikes me as
totally retarded. I'm a pretty good
physicist, but you'd have to be an idiot
to hire me to write code. I wouldn't hire
me to write code.
\_ I assume the job isn't writing code,
but instead working on a technology
to transform the heat from all of their
servers back into electricity. Duh.
Either that or the warp drive they
are building. Remember, Google is
not just a search engine. It's a
conglomerate that is going to change
the world.
\_ Which doesn't do evil! (well, unless
it has no other convenient choice).
\_ Um, that's a nice rant, but the sensible
conclusion is that you don't want to work
for google because you feel their hiring
practices are stupid, and leading to
disaster. It's a perfectly reasonable
opinion, but others may differ. -dans |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Computer/SW/Languages/C_Cplusplus] UID:42205 Activity:high |
3/13 Star Trek fans. Rank the series:
STNG > Voyager > Original >> Enterprise > DS9
\_ Hell no. Enterprise was definitely not better than DS9
\_ DS9 > STNG > TOS > TAS > Enterprise > Voyager
\_ I can agree with this.
\_ What is TAS?
\_ The ASS^WAnimated Series
\_ never heard of it. thanks for the new trivia information.
\_ TNG > DS9 > E = V (didn't watch O)
\_ B5 > Original > STNG > DS9 > Voyager. Enterprise should never
\_ Original > STNG > DS9 > Voyager. Enterprise should never
even have been made. I never saw the cartoon.
even have been made. I never saw the cartoon. [I said B5. I meant
B5. Don't edit my posts. Add your own comments if you have
something to say.]
\_ not that many ST fans here.
\_ TOS > TNG s3-7 > DS9 > TNG s1,2 = TAS > Voy
That TOS is the GREATEST ST EV4R is self evident. No other ST
show has eps. that come close to 'City on the Edge of Forever',
'Amok Time', 'The Corbomite Maneuver' [ far better than the
leem "Picard Maneuver" ], Trouble w/ Tribbles, Devil in the
\- you must pay me 5cents.
Dark [ "I'm a doctor not a bricklayer" ], &c.
TNG also rates lower on than TOS b/c the Enterprise D was such
a pos ("The Romulans are scowling Captain, sheilds down to 20%").
It wasn't until the Enterprise E that Picard had a useable ship
(though the Defiant/San Paolo was still better).
TNG s3-7 are listed separately b/c TNG s1,2 are weak and s2
included one of the worst characters in all of ST, Dr. Pulaski.
She was worse than the retarded genetically enhanced Dr. Bashir
on DS9.
Enterprise is not listed b/c it is not Star Trek. It is a piece
of festering maggot infested rancid week old meet that not even
vultures will eat.
A better question is rank the movies:
TWOK > TVH > FC > TUC > TSFS > TMP > TFF > N > G > I
Re B5 - What a total piece of crap. JMS sux. If he hadn't killed
of Good Kosh and Marcus, then I would say B5 > DS9, but
NO JMS had to kill off the two best characters. Not even
Garibaldi going rouge, Bad Kosh and the addition of Chekov
can redeem JMS. Nothing can.
-stmg
\_ STMG, isn't it true that TNG 1&2 were terrible because Rodenberry
kept trying to recycle old ideas from TOS? Also, isn't it true
that production values on TOS were so ridiculous that only the
advent of Blake's 7 showed that you could could throw even less
money and talent at a SF show and still inspire ludicrous levels
of fan loyalty?
\_ TNG s1,2 were awful b/c Rodenberry kept trying to recycle
TOS plot ideas that they didn't let him film during TOS b/c
everyone knew they sucked (and then Majel Barrett aka
Nurse Chappel aka Loxanna Trio tried to double recycle them
for bad Andromeda/Earth Final Conflict plots).
I also don't like s1,2 b/c they have the bad uniforms and
Riker doesn't have a proper beard.
I don't know too much about B7. I try not to associate w/
B7 and Dr. Who fans. They are really weird, and totally
unlike normal people who watch Star Trek. -stmg
\_ Hey! The correct term for a fan of the longest running
sci fi show in history is "Whovian".
\_ excellent posts STMG. I agree Dr. Pulaski is an awful
character, and STNG seasons 1&2 were subpar. I was wishing
the old ST came back. But things got better after
season 2.
Why don't people like Voyager as much? I thought it
was a good series worthy of the Star Trek name.
\_ Voyager had too many tired rehashed plots, and the
characters were not strong and didn't seem to have
chemistry, and the Vogager ship wasn't interesting.
I think the whole thing was sort of been there, done
done that. Maybe it would have worked better by being a
bit darker and edgier, more towards what Battlestar
Galactica is now.
\_ Although eps. where 7 walks around w/ in a skin tight
suit w/ high heels and a concussion phaser rifle set
to kill are entertaining, one gets to the point where
one begins to wonder if Jadzia would look better in
that outfit. And then one starts to miss Jadzia and
then it all goes down hill.
BTW have you ever wondered why the Voyager looks like
the result of a drunken one night stand between the
Enterprise D and the SeaQuest? Maybe Scotty spiked
the the Romulan Ale at the Utopia Planitia christmas
party some year.
BUT I must say that Voyager has ONE redeeming quality:
at least it was not Enterprise.
\_ STMG, you made me laugh. I think that was brilliant. -- jsjacob
\_ there was a history channel documentary about
"How William Shatner Changed the World" or something
like that. |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Computer/SW/Security] UID:42206 Activity:nil |
3/13 "Big Boost Begins March 19"
http://www.actransit.org/news/articledetail.wu?articleid=c1e6ca52
New transbay bus lines crossing the Bay Bridge and San Mateo Bridge,
service increase to many existing lines, and the new All Nighter
service. |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Uncategorized] UID:42207 Activity:nil |
3/13 For the person asking about mercury thermometer last week, here's
another exchange program: http://csua.org/u/f87 (http://www.unionsanitary.com |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Science/Electric, Science/GlobalWarming] UID:42208 Activity:nil |
3/13 Okay, the Z Machine produced over 290 terawatts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z_machine
Please explain again why we can't store this output in some meaningful
manner for re-use.
\_ store it in what? Energon cubes? Centrifuges?
\_ ZPMs. DUH! Don't you watch SG:Atlantis?
\_ Exactly, use the fact that the sun will be experiencing
increased solar flare activity, thus changing the
gravitational constant near the outgoing wormhole, causing
you to go back in time, whereby you can find an ancient
and ask them how to do it.
\_ Or you can do what I do, I just call out "Thor?! Are you
out there?" and he pops in looking like his usual rubbery
self.
\_ Yeah, he's kind of like a benevolent Q from STNG.
\_ But with less power, more needs, and a rubber face.
\_ I think Oma is more like Q, only nicer. -stmg
\_ Dude, all you need to do is to find an ancient repository
of knowledge, d/l the details into your brain, build the
storage device and then get Thor to restore your brain.
\_ It's worth noting that while 290TW is huge, it only produces this
output for a tiny fraction of a second, so the total energy released
is not that great. In any case, the Z-machine is not a power
generator. All that energy came from outside the system.
\_ RTFA: "Z releases 80 times the world's electrical power usage for a
few trillionths of a second. However, only a small amount of
electricity is consumed for each test (equal to the usage of 100
houses for two minutes)."
\_ Look up ultra capacitors.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-capacitor |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:42209 Activity:nil 57%like:42200 |
3/11 Americans full of contradictions, and as stupid as ever:
[URL changed, now deleted, see kais motd]
\_ Stupid? Why? Because a bunch of them don't share your black/white
views on a very complex and highly charged topic? If only the
world was really as simple as you see it....
\_ The OP is not alone. http://www.slate.com/id/2137775
\_ Did you actually read the slate article and compare to what
the OP is saying? They're in different universes from each
other. OP lives in his nice little black'n'white with-me-
or-against-me world, the slate article is all about people
with a variety of subtle and dare I say nuanced opinions.
BTW, thanks for the slate url.
\_ One person in the room raised her hand to say there are
too many abortions in the US. No one else did. Now,
do you think the OP is in the camp of that one hand-raiser
or of everyone else in the room?
\_ Apples. Oranges. What's your point? |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Computer/Blog] UID:42210 Activity:nil |
3/13 How not to store liquid nitrogen:
http://csua.org/u/f89 (Corante, Chemist Derek Lowe's blog) |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Recreation/Media] UID:42211 Activity:moderate |
3/13 Why I love Walmart. http://www.slate.com/id/2137955 \_ That sounds great. I could actually buy movies I want to see. \_ Sounds great. This is only one step removed from legalized download on demand. \_ Hey, if Wal-Mart can pay a licensing fee per movie, why can't the guy who sells them out of the back of his van? \_ Welcome to the 21st century: rights of individual / rights of corporations = 0 \_ Ability to police Walmart >> ability to police white van guy. Not to mention, scale of Walmart >> scale of white van guy, so ROI on Walmart >> ROI on white van guy. \_ FYI, movie ticket cost about $11-$12 USD on some of the nice theatres in Beijing. Consider how much people make there, you can do the math. *FURTHER* the bigger problem is that the titles which is allowed to be shown in mainland is VERY limited. People would much rather go to see an uncensored version on a much cheaper price. \_ I paid a quarter to see Waterworld in a crappy home theater in Xiamen about ten years ago. Despite that being about what the movie was worth, we split after fifteen minutes. --erikred \_ To apreciate Waterworld, you have to be living and working at sea when you see it. We used to watch this when I worked on a boat, and it ruled. "Dry land is not a myth!!!" \- Is this the "have you served" form of movie critic "vetting"? |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Computer/SW/SpamAssassin] UID:42212 Activity:nil |
3/13 Help me motd! My soda email account only receives spam! No one
has sent a personal or business related email to my soda account
in over six months. Please help me think of use for my soda account
besides receiving tons of spam and trolling the motd.
--bored alum
\_ Sign your name, and we'll see what we can do.
\_ This is why we all forward our soda mail to our real (doesn't go
down all the time and run out of quota) mail accounts with an
automatic spamassassin bonus rating of 1 or 2. --other alum
\_ Hear, hear. I don't automatically give soda mail +1 / +2,
but I think the Bayesian classifier has detected
the spamminess and effectively does this anyway. |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Uncategorized] UID:42213 Activity:nil |
3/13 For those of you in mountain view, this is kinda a neat reference
(for restaurants and which are open when):
http://mv-hours.easilyamused.org |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Reference/Tax] UID:42214 Activity:nil |
3/13 I'm looking to start some part-time sysadmin contract works. Are there
any sites that gives you tips on how to start? What kind of accounting/
billing software can you recommend?
\_ Unless you plan to hire employees yourself, you don't have to
do anything. You will just get a 1099-MISC form instead of
W-2. Just make sure you pay estimate tax.
\_ Make sure the work you do is really 1099 and not 1040 disguised as
1099. Know the legal difference between the two. |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42215 Activity:nil |
3/13 Gallup Poll has Bush at 36% approval rating. Now where's the
motd guy who tells us why this doesn't matter.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/03/13/bush.poll/index.html
\_ Hey, I'm still here. And I still believe it could go to zero and
wouldn't matter so why would 36% matter to me? I've explained why
it doesn't matter. You've said why you think I'm wrong. I
disagree. Whatever.
\_ Do you believe that national policy changes only after
elections? -tom
\_ I think the current administration won't change a single
thing based on any poll numbers. Politics is fluid and thus
fantastically low poll numbers may have an effect on what
Congress does but overall, no in this case I don't think
the admin cares about poll numbers or will change anything
based on them. When he rapes a goat on TV I'll be convinced
that the followup poll numbers will mean something. Anyway,
his numbers *are* low but still not dramatically lower than
other modern presidents at various times during their terms.
\_ Bush's lack of popularity has already changed policy;
the Dubai deal goes through if his numbers are high, for
example. His administration is more or less crippled
right now because he's so unpopular that none of the
Republicans want to get behind him. -tom
\_ Dubai is pretty minor as policy issues go. If he was
crippled, the troops would be on their way home right
now. Dubai falls under the "fluidity of politics"
concept: no one wins them all every time and this is
one of them. He lost far more major things earlier
when his numbers were higher. At this point I don't
think he has any other major policy initiatives left
that haven't either gone through or been shot down so
it doesn't really matter, IMO. If this was a year into
his first term, then yeah totally crippled, absolutely
I would agree. But not now.
\_ The point is, he can't make any major policy
initiatives, because everyone is running away from
him. -tom
\_ I understand your point. As a general concept
I don't disagree. In this case, I do because
I don't think he has any initiatives left
anyway. |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Computer/Companies/Ebay] UID:42216 Activity:nil |
3/13 Who here works at eBay? I have a question WRT feedback policies.
I hate to do this because my eBay rating is over 100+ and 100%
positive rating so far-- A newbie buyer on eBay has been harrassing
me because he's unhappy with an item he bought even though I stated
clearly what the item is (he didn't read). Now he's asking for full
refund WITH his shipping as well, and cussing and getting really
childish about it. Ideally I'd like to warn the rest of the community
members by giving him a bad feedback. The feedback policy says you
have 60 days to give a feedback, does that mean you can't give a
feedback at exactly the 61th day? If so, I'd like to give him a
bad feedback on the 60th day so that by the time he sees it, he
can't retaliate anymore.
\_ ah, feedback sniping. |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Health/Disease/General] UID:42217 Activity:nil |
3/13 Might be time to unload cattle futures.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060313/ap_on_go_ot/mad_cow
\_ Oh no. Now Japan will never import American beef again.
\_ Ever! Because suddenly Japan's land crunch will end!
\_ buy EMRG |
| 2006/3/13 [Recreation/Media, Reference/Religion] UID:42218 Activity:high 87%like:42219 |
3/13 Isaac Hayes (Chef) quits South Park over religion:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/news/archive/2006/03/13/entertainment/e133318S62.DTL
\_ Dude, he's a Scientologist! Hah! |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Recreation/Media] UID:42219 Activity:nil 87%like:42218 |
3/13 Isaac Hayes (Chef) quits South Park over
religion^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^HScientology:
http://tinyurl.com/lo98q
\_ Well, in fairness the scientology episode may have awakened him
to his own hypocrisy, but yeah, probably not.
\_ "James Taylor, what the hell are you doin' in here?! Singing'
about prostitutes to the children! Get out of here!" |
| 2006/3/13-14 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:42220 Activity:kinda low |
3/13 Anyone have an idea where I could find high quality sounds of a
tank being hit by an AT round and blowing up? -John
\_ extract from a movie/DVD/game?
\_ Many movies/games might just use a generic explosion sound.
\_ not free: http://www.leonardosoft.com
\_ My roommate Mike is a sound artist/engineer. I'll ask him and let
you know. He can almost definitely point you to a great non-free
source, and may know of a good free one. -dans
\_ That'd be awesome. I'm helping a friend look around for
various war-sounds; he's putting together sound packs for a free
game mod (Forgotten Hope, pretty awesome.) I dunno if these
types of companies ever donate anything? -John
\_ What game, John? --erikred
\_ Ah, BF1942, gotcha. --erikred
\_ Forgotten Hope actually--nice historical accuracy mod
that's done nutso things with the EA engine. -John
\_ To my knowledge, they rarely make donations, but, in recent
years they moved from a model of buy this sound library with
hundreds of sounds for thousands of dollars, to a model where
you can buy just one sound for, say, five bucks. -dans |
| 2006/3/13-16 [Reference/Religion] UID:42221 Activity:high |
3/13 The scripture says: "Resist not evil: but whosever shall smite thee on
thy right cheek, turn to him the other also."
So after 9/11, shouldn't we have fueled up some planes in SFO and
invited some Al Qaeda types aboard? Instead of attacking Afghans?
\_ No, no. You're interpreting the Bible incorrectly.
\_ Some Christians would agree with you. I would say that while I have
a right to make that decision for myself, I don't for others. Hence
there is no conflict between saying, "I personally forgive you your
transgressions against me" while simultaneously upholding the law,
or pursuing a war. -emarkp
\_ What a cop-out. "I believe in doing this personally, but
supporting government and social actions that are the opposite"
\_ No, emarkp is right. I am only in a position to forgive if
I am the person injured. I am not in a position to forgive
for the sake of the 9/11 victims and their family. For
the victims, we seek justice. Now, does invading Afghanistan
in attempt to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and other Al
Queda members the right way for justice, that is another
question.
the victims, we should seek justice. - christian socialist
\_ This implies that seeking "justice" is the default course
and doing nothing (which is in action the same as offering
forgiveness) is the alternative course of action.
\_ If someone is murdered, raped, etc., yes, society
should seek justice for the person. That's why we have
laws and the police force. Yes, justice should be
the default cause of action. And yes, sometimes
justice fails to be done, or is difficult to do.
- christian socialist
\_ You're confusing justice with a combination of
vengeance and sensible prevention.
\_ I think I have given my (or rather emarkp's)
answer to the question of "turning the other
cheek". I have no interest in arguing with you.
- christian socialist
\_ In regard to the wars, I supported the one in
Afghanistan, grudgingly, but did not like the
invasion of Iraq at all.
- christian socialist
\_ Why should we have secular laws and police? God sorts
out the good and evil, and provides for the good.
\_ No, God want us "loose the chains of injustice
\_ God wants us "loose the chains of injustice
and untie the cords of the yoke", "provide the
poor wanderer with shelter - when you see the
naked, to clothe him", "spend yourselves in behalf
of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the
oppressed". The parable of the Good Samaritan
also tells us that we cannot be apathetic.
also tells us that we must not be apathetic.
- christian socialist
\_ Is that reply in the right place? If so, your
quotes refer to personal deeds. It doesn't
follow that you need a police state to
do that stuff. Ask a libertarian.
\_ I disagree. The quotes tell us that
we have to actively fight against
injustice. Ensuring that our laws are
just and are properly enforced is part
of what we should do.
of that.
\_ Where? The "shelter" and "spend in
behalf of hungry" is philanthropy.
The other stuff is about not exploiting
workers and so forth. In any event none
of it requires setting up a police state
to force everyone to do this; the passages
tell you to do it personally. I find this
contradictory: you are the one claiming
that the "turn the other cheek" only
applies to yourself, and the nation can
justly behave opposite; yet here you
take these words and say they must be
enforced upon everyone.
\_ sorry, but I fail to see what
you are trying to argue about.
also, why do you keep bringing
up "police state"?
\_ heh, you disagreed last time.
this subthread is about the need
for secular laws and police to
enforce them. this is in response
to your claim that we should seek
justice against people who commit
crimes instead of forgiving them.
\_ Ok, but my beef was with
your use of your claim "God sorts
out the good and evil, ...."
as justification for not having
"secular" laws and police. I don't
see how one follows from the
other. And I think your claim
and your use of it as justification
showed that you misunderstood
the bible, which is what I was
pointing out with my Isaiah
quotes.
quotes. As for whether our
current laws and police force
can or should be thrown away,
my answer is "why?". Instead,
as Christians, we should make
sure they are just.
\_ Well, it's just that
"turn the other cheek" taken
far enough would obviate the
need for punishment of crime.
Also, OT quotes don't always
jibe with NT Jesusisms.
\_ If you want NT, there's the
Good Samaritan which I
mentioned above.
\_ The Koran had something similar. I don't know why Christians
automatically assumes that they got the monopoly on all the good
virtues while neither the Bible nor Koran can control those fanatics
who slaughters innocents in the name of God.
\_ I agree with you, except that I take issue with the claim that
turning the other cheek is a "virtue".
\_ Depends. Would you take a nation to war over some tiny
sleight? If not, why not? Isn't that turning the other
cheek? If someone scratched your car in a parking lot,
shouldn't you just kill them on the spot? Why not? If your
kid came home from schol crying shouldn't you find out why
and then kill whoever was responsible? Why not? Getting the
point now I hope?
\_ You realize you're an idiot, I hope?
\_ Ok, guess you didn't get the point. I'm sure ad hominen
makes you much smarter than me.
\_ Sometimes when someone says something really
dumb, there's no point in responding other than
to point it out.
\_ more ad hominen. thanks.
\_ ad hominem. Are you sure you even know
what the term means?
\_ [ > 80 column comment expurgated ]
\_the best you can do is a typo slam? whatever.
how about hitting me up for violating the 80\
columns rule too? Can I get you for starting a sentence with a lower case lette\
r? I note you don't deny my claim that your entire 'point' is just personal att\
ack and that you completely fail to address my point.
[80 col. please]
how about hitting me up for violating the 80\
columns rule too? Can I get you for starting a sentence with a lower case lette\
r? I note you don't deny my claim that your entire 'point' is just personal att\
ack and that you completely fail to address my point.
\_ Uhm, yeah, you missed a 'typo' up
above. And I'm not the some person
you've been arguing with previously.
\_ the best you can do is a typo slam? whatever.
how about hitting me up for violating the 80\
columns rule too? Can I get you for starting a sentence with a lower case lette\
r? I note you don't deny my claim that your entire 'point' is just personal att\
ack and that you completely fail to address my point.
[80 col. please]
how about hitting me up for violating the 80\
columns rule too? Can I get you for starting a sentence with a lower case lette\
r? I note you don't deny my claim that your entire 'point' is just personal att\
ack and that you completely fail to address my point.
\_ I'm not the same poster you've been
arguing with. I'm not 'slamming' you,
I'm offering a correction so you don't
look like an ignorant boob that doesn't
even know how to use a spell checker.
Whatever.
\_ Spell check on the motd? You're
kidding, right? What the hell for?
The motd is often amusing and
sometimes educational, but not worth
spell checking. "Whatever".
\_ Uhm, you do know that you can
spellcheck your changes in lieu of
the whole motd, yes? Wow, I'm
beginning to see why the other guy
resorted to using 'ad hominen' so
readily with you. You know what?
You win -- be an ignorant boob;
it's your prerogative. I'm done.
\_ 1) why would I bother? 2) thanks
for the laughs 3) get over it,
its the motd, anyone anal enough
to spell check their motd
entries... well I won't resort
to personal attack.
\_ Your "points" don't relate to this scripture. You are
saying "don't grossly overreact" but presumably, in your
theoretical system, a large offense will merit a large
response, which Jesus specifically decries. I don't think
there's anything morally interesting in the cases you
list.
\_ Presumably. Or not. You're presuming. I think Jesus
was saying "don't react to petty offenses because the
*other* guy is likely to grossly over react". By not
reacting at all you don't provide the other guy with
an excuse to over react and likely kill you which was
a likely outcome in more primitive times.
\_ Personally, I think it's less relevant what Jesus
really meant than the fact the "turning the other
cheek" has been used by the leaders of Christianity
to help enslave the masses for 2000 years.
\_ No. Fear of burning hellfire and not getting into
a gold paved heaven has kept the masses in check.
\_ Well you are the one trying to say it only applies
to "slight" offenses. You pull that from your ass.
There's nothing there from which to draw that
limitation. But you feel free to invent whatever
interpretation you want to justify whatever
is convenient for your world view.
\_ I expressed my opinion. You're entitled to
yours, whatever it might be since you didn't
bother to share it.
\_ I already did. I think it means what it says.
"Resist not evil." Where do you get this
about "petty offenses"?
\_ Most of the translations say, "Do not
resist an evil person." Some say, "Do
not resist an evil person [who injures
you]." Couple this with the context
(The next passage has "Love your
enemies and pray for those who persecute
you."), and one gets a more complete
picture. Simplifying to just "Resist
not evil" (which translation did you
get that from?) may mistakenly suggest
not to resist evil even as an abstract
concept or when it is done to others.
- christian socialist
\_ KJV Matthew 5:38
"Ye have heard that it hath been said,
an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a
tooth: But I say unto you, that ye
resist not evil: but whosoever shall
smite thee on thy right cheek, turn
to him the other also."
There's lots of great stuff in that
chapter that most Christians ignore.
I agree that the meaning of it is
"resist not evil [done to you]" as
opposed to, say, resisting doing evil.
\_ I think your interpretation is wrong. Emarkp's
interpretation is correct. - christian socialist
\_ You know for a fact what a guy who died 2000
years ago meant based on multiple translations
of books written after his death? Ok. you're
way smarter than me. I'm going to stick to what
I *think* he meant and not make flat out
statements of fact about what he meant. I'm glad
to know someone around here has this all worked
out as fact. Let the pope know.
\_ ah, interpretation relativism - any one
interpretation is as good as another.
If you read the whole context (5:38 - 5:42 or
the whole of 5), your interpretation don't make
sense. Also, Jesus almost always talk about
things that are fundamentally important,
whereas your interpretation is more of a
"technique". From "an eye for an eye" to
"turning the other cheek" is part of the
"from laws to grace and faith" message of
Jesus, which runs throughout the NT.
- christian socialist
\_ Relativism? No. It's ridiculous to come
here and say he *knows* not only what Jesus
_said_ but what Jesus *meant* as well.
\_ It's obvious what these words mean. I
think it's up to you to show some
reason to ascribe some different
meaning to them.
\_ Cf. the Hadith collected by Abu-Dawud: http://csua.org/u/f8v :
"When one of you becomes angry while standing, he should sit
down. If the anger leaves him, well and good; otherwise he
should lie down."
\_ In case you haven't noticed, most ppl are against the war in Iraq,
not Afghanistan...
\_ Pertinent question: are you a Xian looking for interpretation of
scripture, a non-Xian looking to understand why some Xians are for
war, or a non-Xian looking to criticize Xian support of the war?
\_ Why does that matter?
\_ Because if you're either the first or the second, this could
be an interesting thread, whereas if you're the last, this is
a waste of time.
\_ Let's say I'm 2.
\_ Then I would suggest that some Xians place more emphasis
on OT and/or the fiery evangelist portions of NT than
they do on the "Love thy neighbor" portions. It's a big
book, with justifications for everybody. |
| 11/22 |