Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:June:22 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2006/6/22-26 [Recreation/Sports] UID:43458 Activity:nil
6/22    Can someone explain to a non-soccer fanatic what's so great about
        soccer?  Is this just one of those things you had to grow up with?
        \_ telnet <DEAD>diego.ascii-wm.net<DEAD> 2006
           \_ when's the next match?
        \_ It's just another pastime for those whose own lives are devoid
           of any interest.
        \_ Honestly, it's hard to say. For some people, the back-and-forth
           is everything; for me, it's the pressure in the last 15 minutes of
           a game. Also, the World Cup is fascinating to me because of the
           long game: you can lose one match and yet still qualify for the
           next round. --erikred
        \_ I like the crazy stuff people have to do the get goals.  I
           can't understand NBA basketball.  Run to one side of the court,
           dunk.  Run to other size, dunk.  Run back... booring.
        \_ It's more civilized and technical than the stupid
           American Football. -troll
           \_ Ah, young troll -- you forget where you're posting.  Train
              harder, grasshopper.
              \_ You know the "kung fu speak" is really a tiresome cliche now.
              \_ You know the "kung fu speak" is really tiresome now.
                 \_ Keep trying.  Someday it'll work for you.
        \_ *ANY* sport is a culture thing.  I didn't found of American football
           when I came to USA.
2006/6/22-26 [Uncategorized] UID:43459 Activity:nil
6/22    Yes, you can find the results of the latest matches at fifa.yahoo,
        but I've got an updated pdf of the BBC wallchart at:
        http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~erikred/wallchart.pdf
        (Bumped for updates.)
2006/6/22-26 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Taiwan] UID:43460 Activity:nil
6/22    http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/20060622/cm_csm/yhsiang
        Democracy also means lots of corruption.
        \_ Hi troll.  Democracy doesn't cause corruption.  Democracy makes it
           more likely corruption will be publicly revealed and stopped.
        \_ Yes, the glorious PRC is completely free of all governmental
           corruption!... and athlete's foot.  All Hail ChiCom!
           \_ I thought the only way you could get anything done in China,
              period, is to either grease gov't palms or have relatives
              \_ I think the period goes at the end, but YMMV.
              in positions of power.  Is this not true?
              \_ majority of the country works like that, son.  There are
                 about 110+ countries outside the G8.
2006/6/22-26 [Reference/History, Politics/Domestic] UID:43461 Activity:nil
6/22    Is the phenomenon of the American suburban expansion an example of
        free-market at work, where the build-wherever-you-can-find-land
        methodology is used commonly used by most developers today? Whatever
        happened to centralized city planning, is that a thing in the past?
        \_ what are you thinking?  American suburb is result of our Federal
           government policy of subsiding road constructions.
        \_ At least in my town, the city council has made almost any new
           building illegal.  The result is, build where you can find
           land.  Of course, supply does not match demand.
           \_ Which is one of the causes of skyrocketing housing prices in
              certain areas.
              \_ It's worth pointing out that, in my town, the City
                 Council members all own property.
        \_ You mean like in Orange County?  You want to live in Irvine if
           you want strict city planning and control.  I don't think you'll
           like the result.
        \_ Is many cases, the suburban expansion was accelerated by the
           federally funded interstate highways.
2006/6/22-26 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Japan] UID:43462 Activity:nil
6/22    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060622/od_nm/life_sex_dc
        Well, there's your problem!
        \_ This line is great: "Demographers say a rate of 2.1 [children born
           per woman lifetime] is needed to keep a population from declining."
           Reuters apparently needs to invoke the authority of "demographers"
           to confirm simple arithmetic.
           \_ Simple arithmetic would suggest you need 2.0BPW.  The variable
              rates of infant mortality and gender ratio at birth are why you
              ask a demographer.
              \_ Point taken. I think I found it so silly because the
                 fertility rate in Japan is listed in the article as bein
                 1.25, which is obviously a declining population.
                 \_ Theoretically you could have a stable population if the
                    gender ratio at birth was M:F 20:80
                    \_ Or probably even 1:99.
                       \_ Well I meant "given 1.25 BPW".  Let's not go
                          overboard on male fantasies, OK ;-)  -pp
           \_ I keep wondering though, isn't it about the time when we
              should instead start worrying about stabilizing the
              population and adjusting our economies to the new
              demographics? Growing population numbers, even
              without considering the on-going economic growth
              and quality of life improvements, place even
              greater demands upon the natural resources and the
              environment. Do we even know for how long will this
              planet sustain the current living standards for 6B
              people? What about the projected 10B people at the
              end of this century?
              \_ Well, duh.  That's why we're teaching the world about
                 abstinence!
              \_ Who is this "we" that is going to stabilize the population?
                 Who decides who is allowed to breed or not and how many times?
                 And a quick look at demographics of any wealthy vs. any poor
                 nation (excluding the few being wiped out by AIDS) will show
                 that rich nations have declining birth rates while poor ones
                 have very high rates.  So, the best way to reduce population
                 is to improve the standard of living in poor countries.  As
                 \_ Correlation is not causation.
                    And the rest of this post is beyond silly.
                    \_ If you've got nothing to say, say nothing.  If it is
                       silly then shoot it down in a sentence or two, but I'm
                       sure you haven't done any research or reading on this
                       so not only will you not, you can't.
                 \_ Wow.  Midday margaritas make for bad motd'ing.  I totally
                    conflated your comments with the above poster in replying.
                    Sorry.  Nuked my pointless drivel.  However, the silver
                    bullet is not simply wealth (ergo the correlation/causation)
                    but education (which comes along with higher SoL).
                    \_ That's fine.  I'll agree education = higher SOL but
                       that will not come without the wealth to support it
                       which requires a real economy, not one based on charity.
                 soon as we stop flooding them with money, they'll have a
                 chance to form real economies with real products and real
                 workers and engage in trade with other countries.  Right now
                 the West has destroyed the ability of poor nations to grow
                 healthy economies instead of "Charity Based Economies" where
                 there is a disincentive for the local population to do
                 anything productive.
              \_ Blasphemy! Every new child is a gift. "Be fruitful..."
                 Eventually people will fight each other or starve and
                 it will be a happy equilibrium. The world can physically
                 support many more. We must keep going until it's literally
                 impossible to support more. After all, whose life would you
                 deny, just to make your life better? Even bringing up
                 population control shows that you are sick.
2006/6/22-26 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/SocialSecurity] UID:43463 Activity:nil
6/22    Interesting clause by clause comparison of the US constitution to
        the Confedercy constitution.
        http://www.filibustercartoons.com/CSA.htm
        \_ "call a spade a spade." The comparison is interesting but his
           comments are sometimes ridiculous.
2006/6/22-26 [Computer/SW/Languages/Misc, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:43464 Activity:nil
6/22    How do I make rsync exclude any directory containing
        a file named NOBACKUP ?
        \_ see --exclude in the man page.  and really you should have been
           able to find this yourself.
           \_ I did read the man page.  I really don't think it's that simple.
              I can easily exclude a DIRECTORY named 'NOBACKUP'.
              I can exclude a file named 'NOBACKUP'.  I don't see
              an easy way to exclude all files in a directory
              that contains a file named 'NOBACKUP'
              \_ That's a bit more complex. You will need to write a find script\
                 to generate a list of files, and exclude from taht list all
              \_ That's a bit more complex. You will need to write a find scripti
                 to generate a list of files, and exclude from taht list all
                 files that meet your criteria. Then have rsync use rsync's
                 --files-from=  option.  That or make a exclusions list
                 (Again with a find script) and use the --exclude-from option.
              \_ I want this feature too, maybe we should add it.
2006/6/22-26 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43465 Activity:nil
6/22    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32566
        Intel hosts LAN party on Arizona campus.
        60% bring AMD computers, 37% bring Intel.
        \_ Semi-related factoid: The Windows Startup sound was created on an
           Apple Macintosh.
2006/6/22-26 [Reference/Religion] UID:43466 Activity:nil
6/22    "Keeping out the Christians"
        http://www.educationnext.org/20063/50.html
        UC rejecting evangelical High School curricula on the most
        contrived of grounds.
        \_ Those grounds being "you're not teaching science".
        \_ The Hoover Institution is Dubya's west-coast "brain trust".
        \_ The same "contrived" grounds would preclude automatic admission of
           students who attended a FSM school. The real victims here are the
           students who have been used by Christian schools to spark an
           argument over UC's standards.
           \_ Disqualifying a book based on the quotes it uses to start
           \_ Disqualifying a book based on the quotes it begins to start
              chapters?  Sorry, that's just contrived, even if they were
              FSM quotes.
              \_ Physics textbooks containing Biblical quotes?  If we allow
                 that, what's to prevent us from having quotes saying God
                 defined the universal constants?  I propose a Constitutional
                 amendment defining science as driven by testable hypotheses,
                 to the exclusion of religion that does not have testable
                 hypotheses.
                 \_ This is a troll, right?
              \_ Verses as headers are not a reason to reject a text, but
                 they were mentioned in an interview w/ someone that, IIRC,
                 wasn't even involved in the decision, so this is really a
                 red herring.
        \_ I like how the chart midway down doesn't compre Christian Private
        \_ I like how the chart midway down doesn't compare Christian Private
           to Secular Private schools, it compares Christian to Public.
           \_ What do you think the comparison would show? What would it
              prove? How would that affect UC's decision?
2006/6/22-26 [Computer/SW/Editors/Vi] UID:43467 Activity:nil
6/22    New vi macro:
map \ lBmz"zcEx1GO'"zPI/home/dbushong/bin/csua-shortcut '!!/bin/sh"zy$dd`z"zphx
        Now you can just hit \ while anywhere (except the last char) over a URL,
        and it will replace it with:  http://csua.org/u/XYZ (domain.com)
        Bugs to --dbushong
2006/6/22-29 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43468 Activity:nil
6/22    http://mediamatters.org/items/200606200008
        O'Reilly on his radio show, describing how he would stabilize Iraq:
        "President O'Reilly, curfew in Ramadi, 7 o'clock at night. You're on
        the street, you're dead. I shoot you right between the eyes. OK?
        That's how I'd run that country -- just like Saddam ran it. Saddam
        didn't have explosions. He didn't have bombers, did he? ...
        you have to have that for a few months to stabilize the situation
        so the Iraqi government can get organized, can get security in place
        and get the structure going."
        \_ Ah, the right finally reveals its true colors: brownshirt.
           \_ O'Reilly isn't "the right".
        \_ So the WMD reason for going to war: kaput.  The "we'll be rich off
           oil" reason: kaput.  And now "we'll liberate the people": kaput.
           So why does papa bear say this is a good war again?
           \_ So what do you think of the recent partially released document
              revealing hundreds of wmd loaded shells were found mixed in with
              standard shells?  I don't recall anyone saying we'd be rich off
              Iraqi oil.  O'Reilly doesn't speak for the government.  So, what
              are you talking about?  More bashing on some random entertainer?
              Now if there was an actual elected official or highly placed
              appointee who said these things there'd be something to talk
              about.
              \_ The Iraq Survey Group, sent to Iraq by the administration
                 in 2003, said "While a small number of old, abandoned
                 chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that
                 Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical
                 weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible
                 Indications that Baghdad resumed production of
                 chemical munitions thereafter."
                 Looks like the crap Santorium is talking about is
                 the above.  Anonymous motd pundit, how can you take
                 anything Santorum says seriously?
              \_ This outlandish claim by Santorum et al has been widely
                 debunked and disowned.  The shells we have found were
                 highly degraded and dated back to pre-'91 times (read
                 Iran-Iraq war).  As for rich off iraqi oil, we were told
                 repeatedly that this war would cost next to nothing, and
                 that oil revenues would cover the nominal cost:
                 Iran-Iraq war.  Y'know, the ones that we sold them?).
                 As for rich off iraqi oil, we were told repeatedly that
                 this war would cost next to nothing, and that oil revenues
                 would cover the nominal cost:
                 http://www.house.gov/schakowsky/iraqquotes_web.htm
                 \_ Missing point.  This was a small part of a larger report
                    he wants declassified.  It isn't about 500 old shells, it
                    is about "why are we not getting the rest of the report
                    if there's nothing in it"?   Santorum's claim is that
                    there is more in the report we're not being told about.
                    How can you know if there's anything more if the report
                    remains classified?
                    \_ Of course I can't know.  But I do know Santorum is
                       a sanctimonious, mendacious fool, and this doesn't
                       pass the smell test.
                    \_ Wait, are you suggesting that the Bush Admin is
                       holding back evidence of WMD in Iraq? Why? What
                       purpose would that serve?
              \_ Show me a report on the web that doesn't include a freeper
                 URL.
                 \_ So it was only discussed in an open session in Congress
                    but it isn't true unless you see it on the web?  Ooook.
                    \_ Please. They discussed whether TWA800 was shot down
                       by missiles in an open session in Congress. If you
                       have docs, produce them.
                       \_ So now you claim there was no such document much
                          less the unclassified summary document?  There were
                          no shells at all?  You're the only person I've seen
                          to dispute that.  What do you base that belief on?
                          \_ You have yet to provide me with a non-freeper
                             url linking to this report. Please to be doing so.
                             \_ How strange.  It wasn't that long ago (last
                                week) that saying, "I read it on the net, it
                                must be true" was considered sarcasm.  And what
                                does the freepers have to do with it?  Everyone
                                who disagree with you is not automatically
                                your opposite number.  I've read the freeper
                                site exactly once.  I'll bet you're a more
                                avid freeper visitor than I am.
                                \_ Was there a sale on red herrings? I'm
                                   asking for a source for op's point. A
                                   published, paper source would be fine, but
                                   op and I don't meet in RL, so there's no
                                   chance of that; I'll settle for a URL that
                                   is not freeper-based. If you can't provide
                                   it, say so. The Dem below found it, and
                                   further found that it was already debunked.
                                   And no, I don't visit freeper. That tree's
                                   already poisoned, so why test the fruit?
                                   \_ No red herrings here.  You keep ignoring
                                      the point: WMD were found.  They were
                                      supposed to have been destroyed.  All
                                      of them.  Not just from post GWI.  Why
                                      would you not want to see a full
                                      accounting of everything found in Iraq?
                                      That's what the full document is.  The
                                      point you studiously ignore is that
                                      Santorum wants the whole document
                                      released.  The age or count of 500 shells
                                      is not the issue.  It is in fact, a red
                                      herring.
                                      \_ See the URL below, then compare with
                                         this report from the Iraq Survey Group
                                         Final report: http://csua.org/u/ga6
                                         Cf. also with Bush's admission that
                                         the WMDs we had been led to believe
                                         were in Iraq were not there. The red
                                         herring to which I refer is your
                                         attempt to derail my call for a source
                                         with a non sequitur about believing
                                         things you read on the Internet.
                 \_ geez, it isn't that hard -Dem
                    link:csua.org/u/ga0 (santorum.senate.gov)
                    basically these weren't the WMDs the U.S. went to war for.
                    \_ Thank you. -pp
           \_ Does O'Reilly say it was/is good?  He says we have to stay
              and win, but that's not the same thing.
              \_ As a liberal, I could agree that we've fucked it all
                 up and that we shouldn't leave Iraq until there is
                 some semblance of order.  Also I want everyone who
                 is part of this build up to invade Iraq to lose
                 everything politically, financially, and physically,
                 but that is not going to happen.
                 \_ This is where the division among liberals comes in.
                    There are many, myself included, don't think there is
                    anyway we can restore order unless we reinstate the
                    draft and flood Iraq with literally millions pairs of
                    boots on the ground.
                    \_ Whoa there cowboy!  I thought dogma stated that the
                       only answer was to *reduce* the number of American
                       feet on the ground so the natives would have less to
                       be upset about, now you're talking about a draft to
                       put millions of people there who definitely don't
                       want to be there?  The correct answer is to reduce
                       American troop count as Iraqi troop count and skill
                       level goes up until they can deal with it on their
                       own.  I see no reason why Iraqis can't restore their
                       own order given a fair chance which neither fleeing
                       nor flooding will provide.
                       \_ Given a level playing field and a restart of the
                          clock, I agree that the Iraqis have a good chance
                          of restoring order. I'm not convinced that they
                          have that level playing field or the time required.
                          That said, "dogma" is not something I would even
                          begin to entertain in an environment as richly
                          complex as Iraq. -!pp
                          \_ So after the Iraqi government pulls the local
                             militia types into the government, you think the
                             foreign terrorist types will be anything more
                             than pests?  They're such psychos they attack
                             other arabs (Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia come
                             to mind) who are now pissed off and helping the
                             West find and kill them.  Zarqawi was killed with
                             information from Jordan, for example.
                             \_ "after the Iraqi government pulls the local
                                 militia types into the government" may be a
                                lot later than you think. In fact, I hear
                                they've set the date for the 12th of Never.
                                \_ cute but not reality based.  pick up a
                                   newspaper.  talks are on going and have been
                                   for a few weeks that we're aware of.
                                   \_ Cf. the inclusion of Afghan warlords as
                                      "governors" of certain areas of that
                                      country and the resurgence of the
                                      Taleban (not to mention in-fighting)
                                      between the warlords. I agree that there
                                      have been talks; I doubt the sanity of
                                      including more decentralized paramilitary
                                      forces as a solution to the insurgency.
                       \_ The problem is the number of Sunni insurgents is
                          going up as well as the number of Shiite militia.
                          I don't believe we are making any progress in terms
                          of creating "Iraqi" troops (who would fight for Iraq,
                          not a faction).
                          If on the other hand, you say we get out when we
                          think the Sunnis and Shiites come to a power-sharing
                          agreement with an acceptable level of car bombs and
                          death squads, that makes more sense.
                          \_ What is your source for the increasing numbers
                             of insurgents and lack of any progress on the
                             part of the new Iraqi government training their
                             own?
                             \_ EVERYTHING.  Don't you get it?  We're
                                training Iraqi troops, but they're actually
                                Shiite (police), Sunni (military), or outright
                                insurgents.
                                The goal is to give the Shiites/Sunnis/Kurds
                                enough pieces until there is some kind of
                                status quo, I mean, government.
                                \_ Ok so you have no source.  Shrug.  I have
                                   no problem with you having a particular
                                   feeling about it but to come here and say
                                   there are more numbers of this or less
                                   numbers of that is insufficient to make a
                                   real point.  I thought you might have
                                   actual real numbers for the Iraqi government
                                   side at least, which is public info.  I
                                   don't think the other side does a quarterly
                                   public report on their recruiting efforts.
                                   \_ Okay, fine.  There is no hard data on
                                      the number of insurgents, because
                                      insurgents by their nature don't want to
                                      be found (and eliminated).  Most numbers
                                      are for hard-core fighters anyway, with
                                      the number of sympathizers in some
                                      reports going over 200,000 individuals.
                                      However, there is a public report
                                      delivered quarterly to Congress (google
                                      "iraq congressional report") which shows
                                      the number of insurgent attacks growing
                                      (note the graph doesn't show the ramp-up
                                      from March 2003 to April 2004, which
                                      would be embarrassing).  Is the increase
                                      in attacks because the number of
                                      insurgents is increasing, or because
                                      the number is staying the same or
                                      decreasing but they're reacting fiercely
                                      because they're in their "last throes"?
                                      Who knows.
                                      It's my opinion that, while our goal is
                                      to create a national Iraqi identity and
                                      police/army force, what we're actually
                                      doing is feeding each faction until they
                                      can get into some sort of status quo, at
                                      which point we can significantly reduce
                                      the number of troops there.
                                      I completely agree that the number of
                                      "Iraqi" soldiers and police is
                                      increasing.
                                      However, it's my opinion that, while our
                                      goal is to create a national Iraqi
                                      identity and police/army force, what
                                      we're actually doing is feeding each
                                      faction (Sunni military and Shiite
                                      police) until they can get into some sort
                                      of status quo, at which point we can
                                      significantly reduce the number of troops
                                      there.
                                      In other words, what I'm doing is
                                      clarifying what "as they stand up" really
                                      means.
2006/6/22-28 [Uncategorized] UID:43469 Activity:nil
6/22    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LenbSKbn-U
        Congresspeople are idiots. I like the one who admitted he couldn't
        beat Civilization 4. Even on the easy level? Should he be in
        government?
        \_ Because clearly videogames are an ideal determinant for fitness
           in public office.
        \_ clearly we should raise taxes so they can spend more of the
           taxpayers money.
           \_ Absolutely but only the videogames I'm good at.
2006/6/22-28 [Computer/SW/Security] UID:43470 Activity:nil
6/22    http://media.putfile.com/AOL-Cancellation
        Guy attempts to cancel AOL account with AOL customer service rep (who
        sounds like a full-blown American, not outsourced labor).  It gets
        started slowly, but it really builds up half-way in.
        http://insignificantthoughts.com/page/2
        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13447232
        \_ It's amusing that he recorded it and posted it online but his
           experience is dirt common for AOL.  I hope no one was actually
           shocked by this encounter in any way.  It took me 5+ minutes to
           cancel an account a few years ago although the CSR took a different
           direction she still wouldn't cancel it until I'd told her at least
           three dozen times I wanted it cancelled.
2006/6/22-28 [Uncategorized] UID:43471 Activity:nil
6/22    apache temporarily turned off (for an hour or two) until Ed can get
        his act together. We apologize for the inconvience! --michener
2006/6/22-29 [Computer/HW/CPU] UID:43472 Activity:nil
6/22    http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32536
        "Size of AMD's Dell hook-up set to shock ... AMD will be a big winner
        come autumn"
        Inquirer reports it has seen documents in Taipei indicating Dell has
        placed design orders with several Taiwanese companies for desktop and
        notebook systems with AMD CPUs.
        \_ err... you know that AMD is not taking any new order from OEMs
           because they couldn't meet the demand
           \_ err... you do know AMD is building fabs, and the one in new
              york is part of the reason its stock dipped a bit
2006/6/22-28 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Korea] UID:43473 Activity:nil
6/22    Nice pics from a North Korean vacation.
        http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=82755
2006/6/22-28 [Computer/SW/OS/Linux, Computer/SW/OS/Solaris] UID:43474 Activity:nil
6/22    Anyone here deploy Linux-based Sun Rays lately? Thin clients
        sucked a few years ago, but Sun claims that performance is much
        better now. If performance is decent, I'm interested. Lots of
        people at work just use their desktops as terminals anyway.
        \_ we have a few Sun Ray clients here.  They have pretty much just
           worked since we set them up.
           \_ How is performance?
              \_ Fine for clean X apps.  Sun's Java Desktop Suite is a dog
                 regardless of what you run it on. Note that we don't use
                 them for Linux desktops yet.
        \_ i do that all the time for POC purposes.  I prefer *LINUX*
           over Solaris, against my company's party line, simply because
           Linux is still a better desktop OS than Solaris.  What kind of
           information do you want to know?             kngharv
           \_ What makes a desktop 'better'?
2017/09/26 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/26    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:June:22 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>