| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2006/4/6 [Computer/SW/Security] UID:42696 Activity:high |
4/5 Problem: sshd acting weird. Platform: Linux 2.6.x. Symptoms: Ssh
connection got stuck all of a sudden. Cannot ssh into the machine.
Ping ok, and apache2 apparently working. Console log-in takes +5 min &
nothing weird in /var/log/*.log. Restarted sshd a few times, no luck.
Restarted the machine, everything's normal. Two hours later, sshd
is weird again. Same symptoms. What are some possible culprits?
\_ NIS or NFS?
\_ Hmm... any chance you have a bad disk? sshd's virtual memory is
writing to bad blocks, which causes it to run very slow? Or the
blocks where your auth.log or something else that gets written to
on login? -dans |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:42697 Activity:high |
4/5 What do you think the optimal human population of the Earth would be?
As in, what would provide the best balance of happy, safe population,
with enough people to conduct large-scale projects but minimize
competition for resources and damage to the environment?
What benefit is there, given current tech and resources, to having
more than say 500 mil people living at once?
\_ Why is 500 million people the mark? Why not 6.7 billion, the
current population? I've heard people argue that the population
will level off in the next 50 years, but don't know enough facts to
know if I should beliieve it or not. -dans
\_ Issue of poverty and population can be best examplified by
records of Imperial China. Through out the imperial history,
Emperor was obsessed with "average agriable land area per
person" as leading economic indicator. "Economic stimulous"
usually involves on how to increase "agriable" land, and
irrigation infrastures. It is true, that at much poverty was
due to imbalance in land ownership. But at some point,
one would reach the limit of how much agriable land one can
increase... limited by amount of water. Yellow River used to
be larger than Mississippi. It has literally being sucked
dry. Not to mention completely destruction of natural habitat.
\_ Because with the current population, the majority of the people
live in poverty, and we have a lot of pollution and environmental
concerns, and resource scarcity such as oil. With 500 mil
worldwide, we could all be relatively rich, and live in nice
places on the coast and such. Why is more better given the cost?
I doubt the population will level off soon globally (why will it
exactly?) but that is sort of irrelevant to my question.
\_ There is far more than enough food around today to feed
everyone, and enough space to house everyone. Poverty is
more due to inefficiencies in distribution and excessive
concentration of population than overpopulation. How you'd
solve this I don't know (we've seen that planned economies
don't help.) I think dans touches on a good point below,
that agrosubsidies in the rich world are a start. Now when
you start hitting 10-15 billion people, that's a new
ballgame. As for the "500 million people would all be rich
and happy", that's illusory; you wouldn't have the
concentrations of population to maintain a modern industrial
society. Maybe when we have robots for everything, that'll
be true. -John
\_ "There is far more than enough food" -- assuming oil &
natural gas are cheap and plentiful. It took 10 calories
of fossil fuel to produce every 1 calorie you are
consuming.
\_ I question the "more than enough food"... at least, I am
approaching the question not as what is physically possible
but what is optimal, i.e. what is most sustainable and
pleasant for those who are alive. I don't think it's
illusory; you would have as much industrial concentration
as is necessary... you wouldn't need that much of it and
anyway, modern industrial society has a lot of problems
and isn't unquestionably good as it currently exists.
\_ No, my poiont was that given what we currently have, 5
to 6 billion is very sustainable in terms of food,
resources and comfortable living space. It should be
a breeze keeping everyone fed and housed; the fact that
we are unable to allocate limited resources in a more
efficient (note that I don't say equitable) manner,
at least to some sizeable degree due to hokum such as
agrosubsidies, is pretty lamentable. I fear that 10
to 15 billion won't work out terribly well, although I
think it's possible--but we'll have a fairly unpleasant
time figuring out how to manage. In the meantime,
stupid shit like the catholic church railing against
contraception is pretty worthy of a good smacking. -John
Anyway I take it your answer is 10-15 billion? I think
many people seem to approach this issue as "how many CAN
we have" rather than thinking what is optimal.
\_ No, my poiont was that given what we currently have, 5
\_ No, my point was that given what we currently have, 5
to 6 billion is very sustainable in terms of food,
resources and comfortable living space. It should be
a breeze keeping everyone fed and housed; the fact that
we are unable to allocate limited resources in a more
efficient (note that I don't say equitable) manner,
at least to some sizeable degree due to hokum such as
agrosubsidies, is pretty lamentable. I fear that 10
to 15 billion won't work out terribly well, although I
think it's possible--but we'll have a fairly unpleasant
agrosubsidies, is pretty lamentable. We also have the
technology to grow massive amounts of food in a fairly
sustainable manner; we don't because it's currently
uneconomical to do so. I'm also convinced
that getting rid of a lot of the mechanisms standing in
the way of getting people fed would create more
prosperity for a lot of the currently "poor" world, and
prosperous people tend to crank out fewer babies. I
fear that 10 to 15 billion will be very tough, albeit
somehow possible--but we'll have a fairly unpleasant
time figuring out how to manage. In the meantime,
stupid shit like the catholic church railing against
contraception is pretty worthy of a good smacking. -John
\_ It may be sustainable. But is it better than if we
had 500 million instead? Would those 500 mil be
better off? That's my point. I guess it's debatable
whether, if that's so, we should expand to 10 billion
and be more crowded and "rat-racey" just for the sake
of having more people living at once... it's not
clear to me that there's any benefit to that.
\_ I can't argue whether it'd be "better" or not--I
suppose this goes pretty strongly into subjective
criteria. I like having big cities available,
but I'm not fan of huge crowds; off the top of my
head, I'd state a number of around 1-3 billion as
"optimal", but that's just an unfounded guess as
to how you'd have enough nice seaside plots for
everyone available. -John
\_ Is poverty a function of population, or a function of
relative wealth? If it's the latter it won't go away by
decreasing the population. Did you know that we produce way
more food than the current population of the food can
consume? Unfortunately, between subsidies and transportation
costs, it is not economically viable to ship food from the US
and Europe to feed starving Africans. Sad but true. The
argument for population levelling off is that population in
developed countries is in decline (or expected to in the next
1-3 decades), and that population in the developing world is
stabilizing due to hunger, disease, etc.. -dans
\_ Well I understand that removing population also removes
output obviously... but the fact remains that certain
things are obviously limited such as land and oil.
Lots of related environmental issues to that. And just the
simple economics of everyone owning a nice home instead of
being, say, packed into apartment blocks. Food is not
a big problem right now, however, there are related
issues to ever-increasing productivity demands and
industrial farming, and issues such as collapse of fishing
stocks. Pollution output would be much more manageable.
Relative wealth isn't much of an issue in a world without
such inherent scarcity of productive land, water, etc.
(re: stabilization due to hunger/disease... the quality of
life by this point is atrocious. Plus they colonize other
places... Europe is on a path towards a Muslim majority.)
Could we sustain the consumption level of the first world
for all the current population? I doubt it. I think
increasing pop to the point where it's leveled by hunger
and disease is clearly not optimal.
\_ I share many of the doubts you have, but I disagree
with your implication that they are foregone
conclusions. Economists at beginning of the 20th
century projected that the world would be buried in
horse manure if the population trend and use of horses
for transportation continued. What they didn't predict
was the rise of automobiles. What point are you trying
to make about the growth of the Muslim population in
Europe? Are you suggesting that Muslim culture is
somehow backwards or incompatible with traditional
Western culture? Sure, the news is full of examples of
this, but you're also conveniently ignoring the
millions of Muslims peacefully co-existing in Europe
today that serve as the counter-example.
Unfortunately, $ETHNIC_MINORITY peacefully co-existing
usually isn't newsworthy. Many people are happy to
live in crowded cities, New York, San Francisco, and
Tokyo all serve as examples of this. -dans
\_ That point was simply that third-world immigrants
can and do come in to places where growth might
otherwise have stopped, and apparently retain high
growth rates. Please don't insinuate all this stuff
where it's not warranted.
\_ Moving people from place A to place B does not
create a net growth in population. -dans
\_ Not directly but it does allow a growing
population more room to continue high growth
rates. There's a minimum amount of food, water
etc etc that each person needs to survive. By
spreading out, there will be more people after
a generation or two than there would have been
otherwise.
\_ That's a rather simplistic model. As I
understand it, developed countries are
expected to have zero or negative population
growth rates even after you account for
immigration and the possibility that
immigrants will exceed the local birth
rate. You seem to make many of the same
wrong assumptions that proponents of planned
(ne utopian) communities, population
controls, and eugenics made in the early
20th century. -dans
\_ you seem to misunderstand what i'm saying
and actually make one of my points in
your response. the region the people
are moving to overall may end up with
zero population growth as you say but
that is only because the new comers
are in fact continuing to breed at
higher rates, as i said.
\_ Net zero or net negative. If the
same immigrants did not move to
developed countries, do you think
they would have fewer, the same, or
more children in their country of
origin? If you think they would have
more children in their country of
origin, how many do you think would
survive to adulthood? -dans
\_ I think in many cases they have
more than they would at home. Their
kids are cared for and educated by
welfare networks and the parents
are also taken care of with
generous unemployment support and
maternity sabbaticals. I think
one reason growth rates are low
in EU and Japan is the high freedom
of women. Culturally, third world
women don't have this freedom and
this is also embodied into orthodox
Muslim religion. But like I said
originally, this whole argument is
a tangent. -op
\_ Tangent to what? What is your
point? You can't have a
discussion about the `optimal'
population without considering
that maybe this will be
acheived naturally without
human meddling. Growth rates
\_ What? Why not? It's really
_not_that_complicated_.
I didn't talk about making it
so, just what it might be.
in the US are low too. The
above ideas about welfare
networks and `generous
unemployment support' are not
particularly informed. Also,
\_ Ok, why not?
did you know that the infant
mortality rate for families
below the poverty line in the
US is incredibly high? The
under 18 mortality rate for
people below the poverty line,
which includes infant mortality,
is also very high. You asked
\_ ok... so is that good?
maybe there wouldn't be
that kind of poverty if
there were a few billion
less humans.
about the `optimal' population
of the earth. That is,
frankly, a very scary idea
couched in unassuming, sterile
scientific terms. There are
only two ways to reach the
optimal population:
One is to let nature take its
course and hope things balance
out. This is scary because, it
might not work out and we might
make ourselves extinct. Then
again, a combination of human
ingenuity, foresight, and
nature's funny habit of
balancing things out might save
us.
\_ My question wasn't so much
directed at fears for survival
but on the academic question
of whether we'd all be better
off with fewer people.
The other is to assert an
optimal population number, and
try to engineer society to meet
it. This is really scary
because the only way to do this
is for someone(s) to
subjectively decide who
deserves to live, and who
should be killed (or not
allowed to live in the first
place). If you cannot see why
this is a sick idea, you have a
serious problem. -dans
\_ Again, this is all a bunch of
irrelevant posturing. You
freak out at the implications
of the question, but those
implications are your own
unwarranted fantasies.
\_ What wrong assumptions? Who expects this
growth rate and for how long into the
future? The point is, the Europeans
themselves that have low growth aren't
even a major factor. It's the rest of
the world that's growing, and declining
Euros means a demographic shift.
Growth is exponential.
\_ I mean this in the most genial way possible, but I think there's
a problem with the phrasing of the question. The issue is not
population control; it's lack of frontier. We need to terraform
some other planet, and quickly.
\_ yeah, because Europe has so many fewer people now than it did
before they colonized the Americas. -tom
\_ It's a simple question given the current technology and situation
which won't include a terraformed alien planet in the foreseeable
future (at least not supporting a significant pop). So, what's
the problem? Your answer is not to answer and just say we need
frontier. But we don't have it so that's a non-answer.
\_ What I'm trying to say is that thinking in terms of
conservation is smart, but devoting all of our energy to that
and none to solving the problem of limits is not.
\_ There *is* no realistic frontier. Period. Any possible
frontier offplant is tens of generations away from being
viable, and will never absorb significant "excess"
population. Unlimited energy could allow undersea
living in artificial habitats, and underground living,
but is that any way for humans to live?
\_ Yes. Make it possible, and see who goes for it. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Science/Space] UID:42698 Activity:nil |
4/5 Transitional form of water to land animal found:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1748005,00.html |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Reference/History/WW2/Japan, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42699 Activity:nil |
4/5 Amusing little short story by Dan Simmons
http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message.htm
\_ After having slogged through Illium let me just say, wow
he can write crappy short stories as well!
\_ I prefer the smooth stylings of Don "No Soul" Simmons. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Reference/Law/Court, Recreation/Media] UID:42700 Activity:nil |
4/6 Netflix sues Blockbuster for patent infringement:
http://tinyurl.com/qvqpw (reuters.com) |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:42701 Activity:nil |
4/6 I *THINK* I know how to calculate "time value of money." and I
know how to convert APR to "real interest." But I don't know
how to calculate mortgage payment. The part that I don't understand
is for monthly payment, there is a certain percentage of it goes
toward principle. But the percentage (of total monthly payment)
is different from payment to payment. Where can I find the
math/formula on how to calculate this percentage? Thanks.
\_ Look for "amortization".
\_ Look up "amortization".
http://www.hughchou.org/calc/formula.html |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Uncategorized] UID:42702 Activity:nil |
4/6 I know nothing about finances, but I do want to start learning
about it. Does anyone have any recommendations (books/websites/
anything) that offers a good, thorough overview of what I should
know? People in the know have said to "find a good mentor", but
unfortunately I don't have accesss to anyone with those skills.
Any ideas? Thanks. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Uncategorized] UID:42703 Activity:nil |
4/6 For Able Danger/Curt Weldon #1 fan guy:
http://mydd.com/story/2006/4/6/143946/4292
You trust this guy? |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Computer/SW/Security, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:42704 Activity:nil |
4/5 Problem: sshd acting weird. Platform: Linux 2.6.x. Symptoms: Ssh
\_ I thought Soda ran FreeBSD
connection got stuck all of a sudden. Cannot ssh into the machine.
Ping ok, and apache2 apparently working. Console log-in takes +5 min &
nothing weird in /var/log/*.log. Restarted sshd a few times, no luck.
Restarted the machine, everything's normal. Two hours later, sshd
is weird again. Same symptoms. What are some possible culprits?
\_ NIS or NFS?
\_ Hmm... any chance you have a bad disk? sshd's virtual memory is
writing to bad blocks, which causes it to run very slow? Or the
blocks where your auth.log or something else that gets written to
on login? -dans
\_ NFS mounted home dir on remote file server. DNS lookup failure
on that NFS mount, or DNS reverse lookup failure on remote host
but the console login delay implies NFS failure. Or it could be
something entirely different. :-) But I'd check those two first. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:42705 Activity:nil |
4/6 Man tells Dubya he has never been more ashamed of the leadership of
his country at North Carolina town hall
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/060406/480/ncgh11404061755
(Notice the audience reaction)
\_ What about the reaction are we supposed to notice?
\_ doesn't it look a bit like Jerry Springer? |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Computer/SW/Security, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:42706 Activity:low |
4/6 /var/mail is full. I'd mail root, but...
\_ soda: [~] % du -h /var/mail/kislyuk
16G /var/mail/kislyuk
\_ Last login Sun Dec 4 18:44 (PST) on ttyB5 from ....
New mail received Thu Apr 6 09:12 2006 (PDT)
Unread since Sat Dec 3 12:47 2005 (PST)
\_ Isn't there a 25M quota on /var/mail? How did it get to 16G? |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:42707 Activity:high |
4/6 http://nysun.com/timesleak.php Original New York Sun story on Bush involvement in leak. Basically, according to Libby's grand jury testimony: (1) The NIE (the official joint judgment of all the intelligence agencies) disputed Joe Wilson's criticisms about Iraq uranium (2) Bush told Cheney to get the NIE information out. (3) Cheney told Libby this. (4) Libby asked Cheney's lawyer, David Addington. The lawyer said Bush's permission to disclose "amounted to a declassification of the document" (5) Libby told Judy Miller, et al. Therefore, Libby never leaked classified information, because what he said became unclassified the moment Bush said to get it out. \_ But then later they claimed it was still classified, and they hadn't bothered to tell anyone else that they had declassified it. \_ I'm relieved, for a moment I thought that both Bush and Cheney had committed treason! Now I know better ... The [Vice] President has the authority to give aid and comfort to our enemies legally, since if they do it, it can't be illegal! \_ For those interested, backup on point 4 from 2003 -op \_ For those interested, backup on point 4 http://hnn.us/articles/1753.html For completeness, an article questioning the declassification powers of Dick Cheney -op http://csua.org/u/fgb (fas.org) \_ "If there's a leak out of my administration, I want to know Who it is," Bush told reporters at an impromptu news conference during a fund-raising stop in Chicago, Illinois. "If the person has violated law, that person will be taken care of. "I welcome the investigation. I am absolutely confident the Justice Department will do a good job. I want to know the truth," the president continued. Leaks of classified information are bad things." -Dubya 2/2004 Justice Department will do a good job. I want to know the truth," the president continued. Leaks of classified information are bad things." -Dubya 2/2004 I guess it all means what is is, right? He added that he did not know of "anybody in my administration who leaked classified information." \_ See "became unclassified the moment Bush said to get it out". \_ Some pigs are more equal than other pigs. \_ I should also note that the NIE was wrong about the vigorous attempt to obtain uranium (recall that the Duelfer report said that Saddam was trying his best to keep his programs dormant so he could escape sanctions, after which he would resuscitate the WMD programs as soon as people stopped looking), and Wilson's findings about the Niger forgeries were right, but didn't make it into the NIE for reasons I would say are due to a spectactular combination of incompetence and intent to get Saddam. Cf. the delay of the investigation into the political use of Iraq intelligence that was promised after the '04 election. -op |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Computer/SW/Security, Reference/Law/Court] UID:42708 Activity:kinda low |
4/6 http://csua.org/u/fg6 (orlandosentinel.com) Lawyer for DHS ICE Operation Predator chief (who pleaded no contest to exposing sexual organs and disorderly conduct), says he could have won the case: "The victim's account is not credible, Phillips said, saying that if the teen could see 2 centimeters of flesh from 20 feet away when others sitting much closer to Figueroa didn't notice anything, 'she has the visual acuity of most birds of prey.'" \_ 2 centimeters? Now I feel sorry for the guy ... \_ It's not too hard to see 2cm at 20 feet distance. \_ He thinks the average juror Joe would know how long a centimeter is? \_ because clearly, 20 feet from someone is a safe distance to be masturbating. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:42709 Activity:nil |
4/6 What's the name of some free Windows software that lets
me burn a bunch of files to a DVD? The builtin CDR writing
stuff isn't working for me.
\_ BurnISO? Don't know if it does DVD |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Politics/Domestic/Immigration] UID:42710 Activity:moderate |
4/6 Deal Would Put Millions on Path to Citizenship
http://csua.org/u/fg7 (nytimes.com)
Tancredo / Pence 2008
\_ curious... what is wrong with deporting 12 million of illegal
immigrants?
\_ I believe the strategery is for Dubya to publicize his guest worker
program as much as possible to obtain Latino support, but count on
the House to make sure nothing changes (no guest worker program,
illegal immigrants remain illegal and still provide cheap labor)
illegal immigrants remain illegal and still providing cheap labor)
to retain conservative support and to not be blamed for the fucking
of the economy.
\_ Here's the reward for breaking the law.
\_ You know in the UK if you live there for 10 years, legal or not,
you get citizenship. (It only takes 5 if you are legal.) These
sorts of things are not uncommon.
\_ pls post this to http://freerepublic.com and watch yourself get
banned in < 1 hour. Try here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1610298/posts
\_ URL please?
\_ Well, no. I refer you to the British Home Office
http://csua.org/u/fgd . "276B. The requirements to be met by
an applicant for INDEFINITE LEAVE TO REMAIN on the ground of
long residence in the United Kingdom are that: (i) (a) he has
had at least 10 years continuous lawful residence in the United
Kingdom; or (b) he has had at least 14 years continuous
residence in the United Kingdom." [emphasis added]. So 1) you
got the time frame wrong, and 2) the long residence applicant
get an "indefinite leave to remain" and not "citizenship".
residence in the United Kingdom... (ii) having regard to the
public interest there are no reasons why it would be
undesirable..." [emphasis added]. So 1) you got the time frame
wrong, 2) the long residence applicant get an "indefinite
leave to remain" and not "citizenship", and 3) subject to
discretion of the Home Office. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Reference/Military, Politics/Domestic/President] UID:42711 Activity:low |
4/6 Lookout! The elite Venezuelan housewife army is ready to repel any
US invasion.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060403/wl_nm/venezuela_reservists_dc_1
\_ If they're anything like the S. American women I've been running
into, they'll sit around overweight in ugly dresses and sneer
a lot. Real deadly. -John
\_ Sucks to be you. Where are all the Miss Universe contestants?
I have a Colombian friend and she is gorgeous. Thin. Tall. Fair
complexion. Big eyes. Amazing cheekbones. Overall, I think
South American women are some of the most beautiful in the
world, especially if they have a lot of Spanish blood.
\_ I thought it was about a new porn site ......
\_ Is it lead by Alicia Machado? I sure would want to invade to face
her on muddy battleground. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:42712 Activity:nil |
4/6 Commerical plug-in mod for a hybrid:
http://www.edrivesystems.com/news.html
\_ so $1 will save you...$1 |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Computer/SW/Database] UID:42713 Activity:kinda low |
4/6 mysql expert, I've created a db with mixed innodb and isam tables.
The isam tables have *.MYD and *.MYI (data and index). However the
innodb tables only have a small *.FRM file. Copying isam tables
works (when your db is shutdown) but it's not true with innodb.
Where is the actual data and index located for innodb and how
do you copy them? Thanks.
\_ IANAE, but... the data is inside the ibdata* files (see
innodb_data_file_path setting, but probably named ibdata[0-9]+).
You can copy them just as you do the myisam files, when the server
is shutdown. There is no (free) way to do copies while the db is
up (can't lock table like you can with myisam) but Innobase, sells
an ibbackup tool. http://www.innodb.com/order.php -dwc
\_ oh yea... if you're using 4.1 you could have per-table
tablespaces. See
http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.0/en/multiple-tablespaces.html |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Israel] UID:42714 Activity:moderate |
4/6 BTW, this is another (long) artcle generating some waves:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n06/mear01_.html
[SWALT is PhD ucb dept political scence, probably under KWALTZ].
\_ I'm about halfway through but right in the opening paragraphs these
guys are already making opinion based statements as statements of
fact and have yet to back them up. Maybe in the last half of the
paper they'll come through and actually back up their opinions with
something. I doubt it though. If I'd turned in this for any of
my rhetoric classes I'd get a B- if I was lucky and the instructor
liked me. It's a good thing these guys are in PoliSci and not
Rhetoric.
\- Something like "Israel gets 1/5th of us foreign aid budget"
is a fact. Did you ever take a rhetoric class from
judith butler: http://www.lrb.co.uk/v25/n16/butl02_.html
What grade would you give her article? [I think the
first paragraph is good raising the issue of "intention"
being key to anti-sematism, but the rest of the article
"making the point jews" != "israel" is too long.
\_ I hope Jews knows that such action of hijacking American foreign
policy will eventually backlash and rightfully flares anti-semitism
to protect US Interest.
\_ ZOG IS TAKING OVER THE WORLD! ITS THE JEWS! KILL THE JEWS!
THEY OWN THE BANKS, THE MEDIA, THE INTARWEB AND NOW THEY OWN
US FOREGIN POLICY!!1 ZOG IS HERE! ZOG IS EVERYWHERE! THINK
OF THE CHILDREN!
\_ Now I am really worried after I read this. I am worry that USA
is REALLY going to attack Iran...
\- wow, that was fast. i got 3paragraphs in and got depressed
and put it off. you may want to read the 80pp long "academic"
version of the paper. BTW, WALT and MEARSHIMER are top top
people in their field. they arent random people nobody had
ever heard of until they wrote this. i had not previously heard
of the fellows who wrote the FA article below and dont have a
sense of their reputation and track record. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:42715 Activity:moderate |
4/6 Another violator of Nuclear NPT... Let's bring this topic to the
Security Concil and impose economic sanction... wait... how to impose
economic sanction upon ourselves?
http://tinyurl.com/j6dfn (LA Times)
\- i dont think the analysis in this FA article is good, but there are
some interesting facts in it: http://csua.org/u/fgi ... and it is
generating some waves. i think that gaidar fellow in his comments
raises the reasonable matter of "why should the us expect cooper-
ation on iraq if the us is switching to a warfighting rather than
deterrance stance." [it is possible the casualness of the argument
is because it is in foreign affairs. i note the footnote a "more
detailed article" in the forthcoming issue of IS, which may be
better, but i doubt it]. --psb
\_ this is why I don't believe in NNPT. Without any sort of
check and balance, USA *WILL* use nuclear weapon at their
free will.
\_ The USA had nukes long before anyone else. We had the rest
of the world on it's knees, the only healthy economy, an
incredible industrial base, unmatched military might, bases
all over the world, an incredible logistics system and what
did the evil Americans do? We rebuilt the world.
\- the us promoted free trade, the us loaned people money
[and set up the BW institutions], the us provided a
giant market ... "the us rebuilt the world" is like
ALGOR inventing the internet.
\_ Don't let history hit your ass on your way out the
door. The US actively built and provided money to
rebuild the world. And even if your version was the
only thing the US did that's still infinitely far from
what any and every other country in the history of the
world has or would have done in a similar position.
\- I think you've made the point you are a clown
quite nicely, e.g. "the us had nukes long before
anyone else" etc.
Thanks for helping to make my point.
\_ They're going to modernize our nuclear arsenal, and with it they'll
build a satellite controlled system to control and guide these
missiles. THe system will of course be decentralized, and they'll
call it SkyNet. |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA] UID:42718 Activity:nil |
4/6 If you want to shot down Taiwan's "Air Force One," here is a hint:
Think "Aqua Fresh:"
/csua/tmp/kngharv tw_airforce1_aquaFresh.jpg
and here is the picture comparison of before/after
/csua/tmp/kngharv tw_airForce1_before_after.jpg |
| 2006/4/6-7 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China, Computer/Rants, Academia/Berkeley/CSUA] UID:42719 Activity:nil |
4/6 Police in China (si-chuan) in action:
/csua/tmp/kngharv police_chongqing.jpg |
| 11/22 |