Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:March:23 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/Abortion] UID:42387 Activity:moderate
3/22    I'm a foreigner and new to the concept of the legislative branch.
        If both the executive and the congress are controlled by
        pro-Life Republicans, why don't the congress & Bush pass an
        anti-abortion law? Why do you guys need the judiciary branch to
        interpret what is legal and what is not when the other 2 branches
        can create the law?
        \_ The Constitution places limits on the power of Congress and the
           executive branch; the Supreme Court's job is to enforce those
           limits by striking down legislation which is unconstitutional.  -tom
           \_ this is the most interesting part of US government.  There is
              one branch of government which is not exactly democratic and
              provide a check and balance for those who are in the minority
              group.  I don't think other government put this much power to
              a handful of judges like the way US does.
              \_ not being democratic ensures that one branch can
                 do what is right as opposed to what is popular.
                 \_ that is why when I said "not exactly democratic," I meant
                    in a good way.
                 \_ huh? every branch of the government has its checks and
                    balances.  in the case of the judicial branch, the
                    president nominates the judges and senate has to confirm
                    \_ And judges can be impeached, as well.
                    \_ my point is that once they are confirmed, they are
                       there for life, and they can do things that are
                       right but unpopular.  If all 3 branches are
                       elected, they may all be susceptible to the
                       current popular opinion, which may not always
                       be what is right.  In that sense, the judicial
                       branch is a good check on susceptibility to
                       the current popular opinion.
              \_ Canada has a judicial branch that has pretty much the same
                 powers (as I understand it) but they are appointed
                 unilaterally by the Prime Minister.
              \_ I wouldn't exactly call it "undemocratic."  Congress can
                 always amend the constitution, which overrules the judges.
                 We all agreed (3/4?) on the constitution when we became
                 states, overrulling a 3/4 majority with a 1/2 majority isn't
                 very democratic either.
        \_ Actually, this is true, it is possible for Congress to pass
           legislation that will essentially overturn Roe
           v. Wade. Whether that law will withstand a Constitutional
           Challenge is questionable. The reasoning behind Roe v. Wade
           is actually rather flawed (at least according to many law
           pundits) and is based on the rather flimsy (at least in my
           opinion) "right to privacy." The Court itself refused to
           delve into when "life" begins and the dissenting opinion by
           Rheinquist shows that the debate is hardly resolved. Roe
           v. Wade has a good chance of being overturned with the
           recent SD legislation. I'm quite sure that the reason why
           the right wing government has avoided pushing for
           anti-abortion legislation is because it will no doubt
           polarize the nation even further and may result in the
           party losing many seats. Abortion is one of those things
           that most politicians really don't want to deal with in
           reality because it is so controversial.
           \_ Check your assumptions.  While there are aspects of Roe v.
              Wade that suffer from flimsy reasoning, the right to privacy
              is well understood and established.  It's true that some
              pundits with very specific and narrow agendas make a lot of
              noise in an effort to raise doubts about the existence of the
              right to privacy, but the vast majority of case law in the last
              thirty years upholds and supports the right to privacy.  I am
              not aware of any practicing lawyer that would actually try to
              argue a case on the basis that there is no such thing as a right
              to privacy. -dans
        \- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marbury_case you may also wish to
           read THE FEDERALIST PAPERS, esp say #51. BTW, there are sort of
           two isues involved, one if the separation of powers/checks and
           balances and the constitution, the second is that of federalism.
           for example the congress doesnt get involved in say laws about
           shoplifting. that is left to the states. --publius
        \_ Underlying all of the above is the concept that our Founders did
           not trust government so they went out of their way to create just
           enough government to keep things going but put in enough road
           blocks and snags to keep it from growing out of control.  They
           made it to the 1940s.  Not too shabby for a bunch of old dead
           rich white guys in powdered wigs.
           \_ s/1940s/1860s/
2006/3/23 [Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:42388 Activity:nil
3/22    OJ
        \_ Simpson
           \_ guilty
              \_ Chewbacca Defence
        \_ juice
           \_ vitamin C
        \_ Oliver Juang
           \_ hello kitty
              \_ Japan
           \_ TRACI LORDS
           \_ engineer
              \_ LIBERTARIAN!!1!!
              \_ nerd
           \_ Oliver Klozoff
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42389 Activity:kinda low
3/22    I'm writing a word association program that parses motd text and
        links to other words. For example, if enough people write the
        following on motd:
        Bush
        \_ crook
           \_ Nixon
                \_ Bush
        \_ katrina
           \_ disaster
                \_ incompetence
        then the program will "learn" and associate Bush with the words
        crook and katrina. It'll also loosely associate Bush with disaster.
        The more it learns, the more it'll understand how people on motd
        think. So go ahead and play the word association game. Only simple
        words (with nouns) are parsed. Anything more complex will be ignored.
        Results will be shown this summer.
        \_ This needs to be smart enough to draw these relationships from
           the regular motd posts, not these artificial one-word things.
           Nobody is really gonna be posting those except maybe yourself.
           \_ I beg to differ. Look at the responses we got from "Republican"
              \_ But that's an artificial troll for responses to a chosen
                 word. Real posts would illustrate more meaningful
                 relationships as well as offer much more data points.
        \_ look into Shannon's Information Theory
        \_ kchang
           \_ twink
              \_ points
           \_ excuse me I have nothing to do with this troll, why is my
              name here?
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Dating] UID:42390 Activity:nil
3/22    When MOTD boob guy gives up on the boobs
        http://www.bearchive.com/~chili/pestorieshome.html
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Dating, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:42391 Activity:nil
3/22    http://ijc.typepad.com/ijc/2004/09/the_start_of_it.html
        http://www.flickr.com/groups/ijc
        Welcome to the world of the IJC.
        These girls are called IJC's for the simple reason that both on the
        surface and underneath they are all more or less exactly the same
        Interchangeable Jappy Chick.
        Common characteristics of IJC's include but are not limited to:
        -full breasted
        -straight dark hair
        -well tanned
        -slightly overweight
        -over-educated and underemployed
        -teeth a little too white and straight (daddy is a dentist after all)
        \_ Given the amount of time you invested in posting this  trash, did
           she dump you for someone else or what?
        \_ "Jappy"?
           \_ Since she doesn't look like a Nip, I'm going to guess
              "Jewish American Princess" --Jon
        \_ this makes no sense whatsoever.
           \_ It's more of an east coast phenomenon.  The slightly overweight
              thing is inconsistent with my experience, but, eh.  Things
              change.  Oh, just read the blog entry.  Dude, you go to the
              Bowery Bar, what do you expect? -dans
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42392 Activity:very high
3/22    Leaders of the muslim faith
        "Cut off his head!" he exclaimed, sitting in a courtyard outside
        Herati Mosque. "We will call on the people to pull him into pieces
        so there's nothing left."
        \_ Link?
         \_ http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188903,00.html
            \_ No, no, CREDIBLE link.
                \_ quotes are always credible regardless of source
                   \_ Au Contraire, Mon Frere!  The NYT is an excellent example
                      of a place that not only gets quotes wrong but gets the
                      most basic story points and often the entire story wrong.
                      Foxnews doesn't have nearly as poor a record of this as
                      the NYT but they're still just people.  However in this
                      case I don't find the quotes out of character with other
                      things we know.
                      \_ I am willing to bet that the vast majority of people
                         in this world would say that NYT is one of the most
                         respected news organizations in the world.  Only
                         right wing political freaks would dare to discredit
                         that. You want to say Fox News is more respected than
                         NYT?  Try passing that by the typical educated
                         American.
                         \_ The pp didn't say it wasn't respected.  He
                            criticized their accuracy. cf the recent Saturday-
                            edition retraction about their identification of
                            "the man in the hood" in Abu Ghraib.
                         \_ This isn't an opinion poll world wide about news
                            quality.  It is a fact that the NYT has a really
                            poor track record for several years now (that we
                            know of).  Respect and opinion has nothing to do
                            with it.  You want to say that the NYT has a great
                            track record for fact checking?  Try passing that
                            by the typical educated American.  Call me whatever
                            names you'd like.  That doesn't change the facts.
                            When you're doing nwes and claim to be "all the
                            news thats fits to print" you damned well better
                            get it right, especially when you're doing hit
                            pieces.  Anything less leaves you open to valid
                            criticism for being a propaganda organ instead of
                            a news organisation. -pp
                            \_ So are you simply referring to the Jayson Blair
                               scandal?  Or do you take equal issue with their
                               blatant pimping of the Whitewater "story,"
                               their huge flubs on WMD reporting, and the
                               whole mess they've gotten themselves in over
                               Plamegate?  Or is inaccuracy in reporting only
                               bad when it's against conservatives?
                               \_ At what point did you decide what my politics
                                  are?  The fact is the NYT has a really shitty
                                  record re: accuracy in reporting the last
                                  several years.  I could be anything from
                                  ultra liberal to arch conservative and the
                                  facts would remain unchanged.  I am not a
                                  part of the facts.  I merely state the
                                  publicly known.  I note you haven't yet
                                  actually addressed my point which is that the
                                  NYT's accuracy is in the toilet.  Thanks.
                                  \_ It's pretty obvious that if you're
                                     criticizing the NYT over Fox News, we
                                     can safely assume where your political
                                     leanings are.  Fox News makes no attempt
                                     \_ No you can safely assume that I was
                                        on topic with the thread noting that
                                        the NYT has a bad track record for
                                        accuracy and that at least in this
                                        case, we have no reason not to believe
                                        the foxnews quotes were anything but
                                        genuine.  Anything more is just your
                                        personal bias coloring the situation.
                                        Not everyone here has a political axe
                                        to grind.  Some of us actually care
                                        about the truth and more to the point
                                        are sickened by hypocrites at places
                                        like the NYTimes.  At least fox doesn't
                                        pretend to be much more than op/ed
                                        with a wink to objective news.  Quite
                                        the contrary, anyone defending the
                                        integrity of the times is much more
                                        likely to be the one unable to see the
                                        truth.  The NYT has no integrity.  And
                                        while we're here, why would you assume
                                        that only a conservative would attack
                                        the NYT?  Could it be because the NYT
                                        has shown over and over that they can't
                                        report anything like objective truth
                                        without inserting their agenda?  Even
                                        if they were able to do so, they still
                                        continue to screw up like a bunch of
                                        Daily Cal quality amateurs pretending
                                        to be journalists.  When it is hard to
                                        tell the difference between the op/ed
                                        page and the news pages, all is lost.
                                        \_ In case, you've forgotten,
                                           journalism has always had its
                                           roots in placing checks on
                                           government.  "muckraking",
                                           "investigative journalism" are all
                                           aimed at bringing out the truth, and
                                           obviously our current president
                                           has a problem with the idea of truth
                                           and likes to bend it.
                                           And really...
                                           you dont think NYT was there
                                           covering Clinton and his scandals?
                                           \_ I'm ok with muckraking.  In fact,
                                              I love muckraking.  I can't
                                              stand hypocritical self
                                              righteous and *inaccurate*
                                              muckraking.  If the NYT got it
                                              right I'd be their biggest
                                              supporter and renew my daily sub.
                                              \_ What grievous errors did they
                                                 commit (and not correct) that
                                                 you just can't forgive?
                                                 I suspect "getting it right"
                                                 may mean "supplying the facts
                                                 I like".
                                                 \_ You'd suspect wrong.  They
                                                    'correct', sure, after
                                                    being busted by someone
                                                    else and dragging it out
                                                    and doing a page 18 mini
                                                    blurb hidden behind the
                                                    ad for shoe deodorant.
                                                    \_ You didn't answer
                                                       my question.  I continue
                                                       suspecting...
                                                       \_ Answered your
        question.  It is the fact that they never fess up to anything until
        someone else busts them on it and then the correction is grudging, duh.
        Suspect all you want, you have yet to do anything but attack my
        integrity when the NYT's is a matter of public record. This is the
        exact issue we're been discussing but on a micro level.  Instead of
        looking at the NYT's facts, you have decided you like the NYT's
        message so it's ok they're a bunch of wankers.  You don't like my
        pointing out their flaws so I become the one with flaws.  I'm sorry
        the NYTs has a long public track record of screwing up and only
        correcting or retracting after being forced into it (a la Dan and
        the "forged but accurate Bush papers") and you consider that ok.
        Where as you don't like the Fox op/ed slant on the world, therefore
        anything they say is automatically bad for you yet you are unable
        to provide an example of them screwing anything up.  It is your own
        suspicians and bias that colors the truth and prevents you from seeing
        the reality of the situation.  Go ahead and have another shot at my
        character without responding to my core point and then we can stop.
        I've tried to take you seriously but you refuse to respond in kind.
        \_ I asked you for examples.  You should be able to come up with
           at least one.  You haven't "pointed out flaws".  You've made a
           claim.  You haven't backed up that claim.
           \_ From Jason B. to WMD coverage to falsely identifying the Abu
              photo victim to the one they had a few days after that fuckup
              and a few others along the way.  I'm not going to prove the
              sky is blue, I don't have to but there's 3 specific and 1 more
              from a few days ago I can't recall the details of.  NYT = teh
              suk.  Thanks for the chat but I'm now really truly done here.
              I'm going to delete this whole thing later today to save
              precious bits if someone else doesn't first.
                                     to hide that they are a right wing
                                     organization and are headed by one of
                                     Bush's distant relatives, if I remember
                                     correctly.  NYT, and other news
                                     organizations like CNN, at least try to
                                     apply the traditional news models of
                                     being unbiased.  So if you want to talk
                                     about being a "propaganda organ", you're
                                     looking in the wrong direction.
                                     As for accuracy, NYT at least tries for
                                     it, and admits wrong when its news isn't.
                                     I have never seen Fox News do that,
                                     but that's prob because Fox News gives
                                     mostly opinion pieces anyway.
                   \_ "we cannot find security." GWB, SotU.
        \_ Hey, a real martyr in the Christian tradition.
        \_ I like how the cleric calling for the execution of the Christian,
           no matter if he's labelled "insane" or not, is labeled "a moderate".
           no matter if he's declared "insane" or not, is labeled "a moderate".
           What, you don't believe in OUR invisible all powerful deity? You
           must be insane!
           \_ This illustrates a point made in "The End of Faith", namely that
              religious moderates provide "cover" for religious extremism...
              even across faiths.  Do you think Bush is going to say "you
              shouldn't use religion/holy texts to guide your courts"?  Of
              course not.  But he should.
              \_ Which is why we'll never win the war against islamist
                 extremists as long as those fuckers are in the white house.
                 This global conflict centers on the two things this
                 administration is more incapable of speaking truthfully about
                 than anything: religion and oil.
                 \_ What's the truth about oil?
                        \_ That 1) the peak in production is imminent (might
                           be now, prob right around 2010, 2020 if we're
                           insanely lucky) and that 2) this fact is the main
                           driver behind our foreign policy, for example,
                           invading Iraq.
              \_ I'm actually reading the book right now.  It has some good
                 points but also long rambles about ethics.
2006/3/23-25 [Reference/Tax] UID:42393 Activity:high
3/23    Chinese levies taxes on non-environmentally-friendly products:
        http://tinyurl.com/k3922 (NY times)
        I can't wait to see what would happens if USA does the same thing.
        and... if Bush is serious about remove dependency on foreign oil,
        he should levy taxes on gasoline :p
        \_ bush would never raise taxes.  well, except on the poor.
           \_ I think any commodity tax is innately a regressive tax, and
              therefore "on the poor".
           \_ Does he also call them fees?
        \_ are you nuts?  any idea how much each gallon is already taxed?
           what do you mean "he should levy taxes on gasoline".  we already
           have gas taxes and they only go up.
           \_ I am talking about raise it to $1 / gallon.  Use these taxes
              to fund roads, freeway, bridges.
              \_ Seriously, dude.  It's already higher than that.  It already
                 funds roads, freeways and bridges....  Wanna do a little
                 research before deciding on public policy?
           \_ he's just dumb. he also has bad grammar. "Chinese levies..."
              \_ not if levies is a noun
                 \_ then "Chinese levies taxes" doesn't work. so you're
                    dumb too.
              \_ bad grammar, but dumb?  I beg differ.  I am just making
                 too much sense here, because gasoline tax will encourage
                 people drive less, drive a smaller car, etc.
        \_ How about if the US would just stop subsidizing so many
           environmentally UNfriendly things?
        \_ wow, ship all the democrats to china, they'd love these taxes.
           \_ Why not send the Republicans--they'd love the oppression,
              prison camps and corruption?
                \_ We already ship all of our pollution to China, by proxy.
           \_ Gasoline should be taxed to pay all the costs of roads, pollution
              cleanup, etc. etc.  A lot of car ownership and usage is
              subsidized.
              \_ That's a nice delusion tree-hugger. Keep smokin' whatever it
                 is you are smoking, it obviously makes you smarter than the
                 suits that run the world.
                 \_ Are you trying to bait foaming-at-the-mouth anti-car guy
                    into a rant?
                 \_ how much was the highway bill last year again?  you don't
                    call it a subsidies?
                    \_ because without highways our economy and society would
                       mostly collapse.  all government spending is a form of
                       subsidy for something.  if you don't like subsidies
                       then let's cancel taxes and stop having a government.
                       \_ Yep. Without those billions spent on bridges to
                          nowhere in Alaska, the fucking planet would probably
                          stop spinning.
                          \_ Every bill has pork.  Picking a single pork
                             project and painting the entire system with it
                             is intellectually dishonest and rhetorically
                             cheap.  What's the point of posting one liner
                             snap shots?
                       \_ That may or may not be true, but it is hard to
                          argue with a straight face that car driving is
                          not subsidized.
                          \_ Of course it is.  Who said it wasn't?  -driver
                       \_ why highway? why not railroad tracks? light rails?
                          bike lane?
                          \_ Rails are already subsidised and have been for
                             150+ years.  Bike?  Nice for short single trips
                             for healthy people but we're not about to
                             restructure society so everyone lives in a village
                             or near quality public transit.  Public transit
                             \_ Why aren't we?  Do you think magic Jetson
                                style perpetual motion runs on air funny
                                cars are going to be sold by GM next year?
                                We should start preparing for a non
                                car centric lifestyle now or suffer
                                the serious consequences later.
                             has other issues such as inflexibility and one
                             event can bring 10s of thousand of people to a
                             halt such as the Oakland BART shut down the other
                             day.  We need a variety of transit options and
                             quite frankly all of them have already been
                             subsidised.  How many bikers ever paid for using
                             or creating a bike lane, for example?
                                \_ Would people please stop bitching about
                                   subsidies for mass transit/biking? The
                                   subsidies for automobiles dwarf any other
                                   transit subsidies.
                                   \_ I wasn't bitching.  I'm saying *all*
                                      transit is subsidised.  Yes, some more
                                      than others but it all is.
                                   \_ URL? I want to see the amount of $$$
                                      spent on highways outside of the $$$
                                      collected by gas and automobile
                                      taxes versus the amount spent on
                                      mass transit.
        \_ Actually a Carter-era tax idea was to raise taxes on gasoline $1-
           $2 per gallon, and then rebate the same money back in the form
           of lower payroll taxes (most Americans pay more in payroll taxes
           than in income taxes).  It doesn't raise taxes and still encourages
           conservation.
           \_ Don't "payroll taxes" _include_ income taxes?
              \_ no.
           \_ until they make up a reason to raise payroll taxes later then
              you're stuck with both taxes which will continue rising.
                \_ You mean like what Reagan did? Well the current climate
                   is to never raise taxes, cut them whenever possible and
                   have future generations & massive inflation deal with the
                   ensuing problems.
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Food] UID:42394 Activity:moderate
3/23    What do you think of the latest South Park, Chef Returns episode.
        \_ I haven't seen it, but heard it was totally over the top.  I'm
           looking forward to it. -dans
        \_ It was awesome.
        \_ It was indeed awesome, if a bit silly.
        \_ What happened, did they get a new Chef voice or something?
           \_ i hear they spliced and re-used his old lines
              \_ yep, and worked that into the plot
           \_ They also worked in a few digs at Isaac Hayes and Scientology
              through metaphor.
        \_ almost as good as zardoz.
2006/3/23-25 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:42395 Activity:high
3/23    Have you done your taxes yet?  Do you owe or do you get a refund?
        \_ owed $4500 (too much capital gains)
           \_ L'chaim. -dans
        \_ Only got $1500 from the feds, $600 from CA.
           \_ you didn't "get" anything.  it was your money in the first place.
                \_ Except for the portion lent to us from China, Japan, Europe,
                   etc.
        \_ Damn alternative minimum tax cost us $4000 above what we'd
           normally pay. No weird deductions, just a mortgage. Doh!
           \_ Yeah so?  That just means you're rich and need to be taxed even
              more.
        \_ $160 back Fed, $700 CA (don't ask)
        \_ $3k Fed, $3k CA...first year with a home, I immediately raised
           my exemptions after I found out how much money I could have had
           all year to invest.  I love home ownership, I compared my apt to
           home taxes and have saved $12K overall.  Even accounting for
           property tax ($7k), I still save $5k a year with a home.
           \_ really?  can you show us the math?
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Pets, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42396 Activity:nil
3/23    http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/03/22/doghandler.sentenced/index.html
        Abu Ghraib dog handler conviction
        "He also was convicted of allowing the dog to participate in the lewd
        acts of licking peanut butter off of a woman's chest and a man's
        genitalia." (Not off prisoners, but fellow soldiers, for entertainment)
        \_ Dog's razor sharp teeth + genitalia == Worst jackass episode evar!
           \_ A dog's not going to _accidentally_ bite you while licking
              peanut butter.
              \_ Uhm, either way, why would anyone want a dog doing that to
                 them?  Yech!
              \_ I beg to differ.  I think the dog would try to take a bite
                 out of what it's licking.  For instance, I've never seen
                 a dog satisfied with just licking a piece of meat - it
                 usually tries to bite a chunk off of it. -!pp
                 \_ dogs are experts at licking balls..
                 \_ Dogs know the difference between a hunk of meat and a
                    person.
                    \_ That's true in general...but once a dog gets excited,
                       the line often gets a little blurry, then Bad Things
                       are (much) more likely to happen -- especially when
                       you've mixed dog+genitals+food.      -!PP
                    \_ I don't think peanut-buttered dangling penises are
                       things a dog normally knows much about.
                    \_ How drunk would you have get to test that theory?
                    \_ That would be a great darwin award.
         \_ So this joker just magically got it in his head one day
            to "release the hounds"?  What about his superiors?
            \_ I think the way it worked was: there was a lot of bad stuff that
               happened that produced some sort of results.  The superiors
               didn't order or condone it, but probably rewarded the results.
               The people we're seeing are the failures who got caught.
            \_ Umm... "let slip the dogs of war"...
            \_ So all the underlings had spontaneous outbreaks of
               uncontrollable urges to torture inmates?  I still don't know
               how anyone prosecuting the absolutely lowest people on the
               totem pole do not break out laughing uncontrollably.
                \_ Maybe they used to be Wal-Mart executives.  "Here's
                   your payroll.  You can't actually run your store with it
                   legally, but that's your problem.  Be creative!"
2006/3/23-25 [Uncategorized] UID:42397 Activity:nil
3/23    Incompetence or planned chaos?  Your choice:
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11965317/site/newsweek
2006/3/23-25 [Computer/Blog] UID:42398 Activity:nil
3/23    Ickiest Flickr set ever
        http://www.flickr.com/photos/90495823@N00/sets/72057594066067989
        \_ Ick factor is high. Thanks for the warning, ass.
        \_ Hard to tell for sure what some of them are - is there a list
           anywhere?  Guesses from people?
           \_ Dude says "micro photos".  Microscopic photos of his skin?
              \_ certainly microscopic photos of the body, just trying
                 to figure out which specific parts each are, and whether
                 this set is educational or pornographic.
2006/3/23-25 [Uncategorized] UID:42399 Activity:nil
3/23    I love these
        http://www.flagrantdisregard.com/flickr/motivator.php
        http://static.flickr.com/36/83315953_82ca365610_o.jpg
        http://static.flickr.com/25/56787838_e675c8e66f_o.jpg
        http://flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=25925432&size=o
                \_ Text borrowed from http://www.despair.com
                   \_ With additional typo.
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Dating] UID:42400 Activity:very high
3/23    I was watching Donny Deutsch show, and he was doing the child
        sex baiting thing again.  How come all the 50 people who showed
        up at the house ready to have sex with a "13 year old girl" were
        guys.  Also, how come like 49 of them are white guys (only
        exception is one indian sikh dude)?  Is internet porn turning
        lots of ordinary people into sex perverts?  Then again, while
        we think of these peole as law breaking perverts, they behavior
        would be okay in ancient Greece, China, Rome, etc., and also some
        third world countries today.  Also, many of them seem to be gay
        (likes boys too).  This particular sting was done in LA.
        \_ http://www.anthemamerica.com/New%20Jpegs/Chance_1%5B1%5D.jpg
           As time goes on you become more and more frustrated. That's all.
        \_ Isn't 14 the legal age in at least one state? And in a lot of
           countries even today I think it's that or even lower. So 13
           being a "child" is a little misleading. I'm not saying it's
           right, but there is a huge difference between say 8-9 and 13.
           I guess they picked the oldest plausible age for a "child".
           I wonder how the turnout statistics would vary with a lower age.
           \_ Lolita, light of my life, fire of my loins. My sin, my soul.
        \_ What do you mean by asking "How come all the 50 people who showed
           up at the house ready to have sex... were guys"? Were you
           expecting lots of dykes?
           \_ Donny was mentioning about it, and there were previous shows
              where the bait was a 13 year old boy, and everyone showing
              up were also guys.
              \_ Yes, because lots of women just love sex with strange teenaged
                 boy. I don't understand your comments. Are you surprised?!
                 \_ Especially if they are grade school teachers!
                    \_ That's why I added 'strange'. The teachers had
                       'relationships' with these kids.
2006/3/23-25 [Computer/SW/Unix] UID:42401 Activity:nil
3/23    FYI, I extolled the virtues of Emacs TRAMP mode on the motd a little
        while back.  It still rocks out, but takes a little tweaking to work
        effectively on soda.  I was unable to get it working with tcsh, so I
        changed my default shell to bash.  I didn't put much effort in to
        this.  If you're married to tcsh, it's probably doable.  More
        importantly, you'll want to set '(tramp-chunksize 150) in your .emacs.
        -dans
2006/3/23-25 [Recreation/Computer/Games] UID:42402 Activity:high
3/23     Any one reccomend a mod chip installer for the ps2?
        \_ Well, if all you want to do is play your completely legitimate
           single backup copy of a game or imports, you will most likely
           be better served by a bootdisc.  While there are a couple odd
           exceptions that don't work with it, they are a minute minority.
           The office currently is using Swap Magic 3.6 to great effect.
           There are physical mods for your case (for both the regular and
           slim line) that make swapping the disc really easy.  All in all,
           considering the probability of borking your ps2 terribly or
           paying through the nose for a modchip and someone to install it,
           the bootdisc is the better deal.
        \_ If you have the old school ps2, you can backup your games to an
           IDE hard drive w/ the network adaptor, and play them using a
           memory card + PS1 game with buffer overflow trick --
           google for PS2 Independence exploit -- it's quite nice:
           no swapping, reduced loading times, etc...
           You will probably need to swap once, or know someone who can write
           arbitrary data to a memcard to get you started though.
                \_ I should have been more specific Iwant to modify
                a ps2 to play Japanese games. I know, for example, the ps1
                required a single mod chip that I got installed at a local
                shop that is no longer in business.
                    \_ Apparently hdloader (the program you boot with the
                       exploit trick) ignores region checks so it will
                       allow you to play most .jp games, no mods needed
                       BTW, a similar trick supposedly exists for XBOX, too.
                                \_ all of the hardware you have to buy online ?
2017/09/23 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/23    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:March:23 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>