Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:July:11 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2006/7/11 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:43626 Activity:nil
7/11    Holy shit, Paper Clip dude bought a house:
        http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/internet/07/10/paper.clip.to.house.ap
2006/7/11 [Recreation/Dating] UID:43627 Activity:high
7/10    I am in 'open' relationship, kind of, as in, I have a girlfriend...
        and she dates other people.  I figured out her yahoo mail password,
        read her email, and discovered that over the holidays she
        visited her out of state boyfriend, and I found a message
        where she mails him about how awesome the sex was.
        So, I am a shit for reading her email, and we are in an
        open relationship, but I should be on http://grouphug.us
        \_ and you're not dating others because ...
           \_ Poor time management skills.
        \_ yeah, group hug because you suck.
        \_ just dump her without telling her what you know, but do it like
           a real jerk.
             \- i recommend you head butt her. --beavis@soda
        \_ Well, what do you want from her?  You could just think of her
           as someone to have sex with.  You knew it was an open
           relationship before, right?
        \_ I guess I don't understand. If you agreed to an open
           relationship, what's the problem?  I personally wouldn't get
           into an open relationship, but it seems a bit late to complain
           now.
        \_ I guess what's relevant here is, did you ask her where she went/
           did she lie to you?  If she lied, then open relationship or not,
           something's wrong.  If you ask casually ("so where'd you go?" vs.
           "where WERE you!?") and she gets defensive, something's wrong.
           Otherwise, if it's an open relationship, you should be able to talk
           about it.  "Ooh, tell me about him!  How's the sex?"  BTW, if I
           found out my S.O. broke into my email without asking, I'd dump them
           faster than you can say "invasion of privacy"
2006/7/11 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:43628 Activity:nil
7/10    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13806135
        Who says Iraq businesses aren't doing well? Here is more proof that
        free-market can work in Iraq, and how!
        \_ So now everyone will do this and the militias will start killing
           people they suspect are faking it, and one of these days they'll
           kill their own sect, and they'll be sub-sectarian violence.  Huzzah!
2006/7/11 [Computer/SW/Compilers] UID:43629 Activity:nil
7/11    Is there a way to turn off specific warnings on the intel 9.0 C++
        compilers?  The man page says -wd[warning number] should suppress
        the warning, but that isn't working for me at all.  The only
        think that does is just -w, but that suppresses ALL warnings.
        \_ grep -v warning-that-I-dont-care ...
2006/7/11 [Uncategorized] UID:43630 Activity:nil
7/11    Syd Barrett RIP
2006/7/11 [Transportation/Bicycle, Finance/Investment] UID:43631 Activity:moderate
7/11    Are there floor model bicycle pumps that can switch between high
        volumn and high pressure? I can barely pump up to 85 PSI for my bike
        and I'm wondering if they have a pump that can switch to pumping
        high pressure, like some of those fancy portable pumps. ok thx.
        \_ How would such a thing work?  PV=nRT, with n,R,T relatively
           constant.  Since the compression cylinder would have to be
           a constant volume initially, it seems like it's always going
           to be a PITA to pump to high pressure, no matter what?
        \_ Decent floor pumps don't have difficulty pumping to high pressure.
            -tom
           \_ I just returned my $25 made in China pump for a $30 made in
              Germany pump. Both of them are hard to pump after 95PSI which
              was a big disappointment. It took a lot of efforts to get up
              to 115PSI. After 95PSI, if the pump handlebar isn't pressed
              down completely, the pump handle forces it to pop back up
              probably because the valve is opened up and the pressure built
              from the tire pumps the handlebar upwards! Is this normal?  -op
            -tom
              \_ No, it's not normal.  I have something similar to
http://www.performancebike.com/shop/profile.cfm?SKU=21099&subcategory_ID=4360
                 and I can easily pump to 120psi.  One thing: Presta valves
                 are much better for bikes than Schraeder (car-type) valves,
                 partly because of this specific issue.  Switch to presta if
                 you are using Schraeder now.  -tom
        \_ Force required to pump = cross section of pump * pressure
           Volume pumped = cross section * length
           Max achievable pressure = Your strength / cross section of pump.
           So you can see the only way you can get a high volume and a low
           force requirement if to have a pump change diameter as pressure
           increases.  This is not a practical design.
           \_ It's not impractical at all.  One simple way to do it is to have
              two chambers in the pump.  Use both of them for high volume/low
              pressure, or one chamber for low pressure/high volume.  In case
              you missed it, there are mini pumps on the market that
              incorporate such a feature.  There's no real point in putting
              it into a floor pump since good floor pumps are so much easier
              to use.
        \_ My favorite floor pump is the Topeak Joe Blow Pro; I find it quite
           easy to use to inflate my 120psi tires.  To give you another data
           point, I'd avoid the Silca Super Pista (people rave about how
           serviceable it is, but it requires a lot of force, and you have to
           hold the head on the valve, so you're left inflating with one hand).
2006/7/11-13 [Politics/Domestic/911, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:43632 Activity:moderate
7/11    Dubya flip-flops.  All DoD personnel are to comply with Geneva
        Conventions for all detainees, including GTMO detainees.
        No mention of CIA policies.
        \_ It's all David Addington's fault.
        \_ Even the Pentagon agrees that the Geneva Convention applies
           to Gitmo detainees:
           http://www.csua.org/u/ge0
           \_ Yes, they "agreed" after the SCOTUS decision
              Please note that "the Pentagon" == Rummy
              (yes, I do know that probably the majority of professional
              military lawyers in the govt thought Dubya's policies were
              illegal)
        \_ Why are you upset that Bush would adhere to a treaty?  You were
           happier when he didn't?
           \_ In order: 1) Happy that he will adhere to a treaty. 2) No.
              3) Dubya's a flip-flopper. Cf. pot, kettle, election 2004.
              \_ 1&2: ok. 3: The policy change seems to be nothing more than
                 PR.  I don't see that the everyday life of the average Gitmo
                 terrorist is going to change at all.  As far as 2004 goes,
                 the USSC already said they can't do tribunals like they want
                 so there's no reason to not say we're now following Geneva.
                 That's a far cry from voting for it before voting against it.
                 \_ there is nothing flip-flopping about voting against a
                    bill after a vote for amendment you sponsored fails.  -tom
                    \_ missing the point.  it wasn't his action that was under
                       assault but his self presentation.  he came off like a
                       dithering clown with that line.  if he was a (R) you
                       wouldn't be all over him for it calling him an idiot?
                       \_ It's impossible to have every sentence you say
                          scrutinized in public without coming off badly
                          sometimes.  Certainly Kerry didn't come off badly
                          based on his statements as often as Bush does.
                          The main thing is that Rove and the dittohead machine
                          seized on that line as a political lever, a way
                          to portray Kerry's subtlety as indecision and
                          Bush's bull-headedness as strength.  And you fell
                          for it.  -tom
                          \_ Comparing to GWB is off topic.  I never said GWB
                             was brilliant.  I said Kerry looked like an idiot.
                             Yes, he was tired, yes he had been long on the
                             campaign trail, yes, what he said was technically
                             correct, and yes he looked like a buffoon.  If he
                             was a (R) would you be here defending him or
                             telling us how often he comes off looking bad
                             compared to some other (D)?  Kerry can look like
                             an idiot all on his own.  Comparing an idiot to a
                             chimp doesn't make the idiot any less an idiot.
                             \_ To answer your spittle-flecked question, no,
                                I do not spend my time pointing out the verbal
                                miscues of Republicans.  There are plenty of
                                substantive issues with what Republicans do;
                                there is no need for gamesmanship.  You seem
                                to be inordinately focused on a single verbal
                                miscue (which you brought up, no one else)
                                with no substantive error behind it.  -tom
        \_ wouldn't it be nice if the 'terrorists' were as nice with the
           US troops they captured, instead of killing, mutilating them and
           leaving the bodies booby-trapped.
           \_ We should not descend to the level of the enemy and still expect
              to hold the moral high ground.  The arguments for why we should
              have nukes and no one else, for example, basically involve
              "because we're better people"  If we stop being better people
              in real, measurable ways...
              \_ PP wasn't suggesting we descend.  Where did you see that?
                 They were suggesting that it would be nice if the terrorists
                 weren't, well, terrorists and didn't mutilate captured US
                 troops and leave their booby trapped corpses to be found.
                 What is so wrong with that?  -!PP
                 \_ You're being obtuse.  -5 points.
                    \_ No, you're being cynical and reading things that
                       aren't there.  I don't need or want your "points".
                 \_ He was implying we should measure ourselves by their
                    actions.  -John
                    \_ I didn't see that at all but I'm a glass half-full
                       person.  I don't look for the bad in others.
                       \_ Then what the fuck are you doing on motd?
        \_ Flip-flops?  You mean obeys order from SCOTUS, right?  A ridiculous
           order BTW, since AFAIK Al Qaeda isn't a signatory to the GC.
           \_ Common Article 3 applies regardless of whether al-Qaeda signed
              or not, and regardless of citizenship or lack thereof
              \_ Not entirely obvious since "terrorists" as we know them
                 today didn't exist at the time the GC was written/signed so
                 they aren't well defined by it.  If it was written today, they
                 would much more likely fall under the spy/saboteur bit where
                 the GC has no issue torturing and executing them.  Granting
                 humane POW style treatment to members of amorphous shadowy
                 organisations who fight by directly targetting civilians does
                 not appear to be the intent of the GC given the way spies and
                 other non-uniformed combatants are treated.
                 \_ I'm trying to not make a strawman of your argument, but
                    as far as I can tell, you are trying to defend torturing
                    people. Why? What do we gain by treating people
                    inhumanely regardless of whether they are in a shadowy
                    amorphous organization or not? I just don't get it.
                    \_ I'm saying what I said.  Don't read between the lines.
                       There is nothing between the lines.  The GC was written
                       before the current concept of "terrorist" existed, thus
                       the best the GC can do is apply the spies/saboteurs
                       line which allows tribunals, death, etc.
                \_ No, the GC does not allow anyone to be tortured. Are you
                   the same person you claimed that the US is not a signatory
                   to the GC? You are a very seriously misinformed person.
                   The 4th Convention of the GC very clearly states that
                   everyone is covered by it, just some have more rights than
                   others. We could certainly execute them, but only after a
                   trial by a competent tribunal. Please read it for yourself
                   so that you can make informed statements about what it says.
                   \_ Key point: some have more rights than others.  Also, I
                      didn't say they weren't covered by it.  I said quite
                      clearly that the closest thing that covers them is
                      spies/saboteurs.  Please don't put words in my mouth.
                      And no, I'm not that other person who said we didn't
                      sign.
                      \_ "..the GC has no issue torturing ... them"
                         This is wrong. Common Article 3 sets minimum standards
                         for everyone caught up in armed conflict, including
                         civilians and irregular forces. It prohibits
                         torture and humiliating or degrading treatment.
        \_ do we have a definition of what "terrorist" is?  It seems that
           we call anyone we don't like "terrorist."
           \_ "If you are not with us, then you are with the terrorists." -GWB
              Does that mean that the military can summarily execute anyone
              who votes Democratic?
              \_ No.  It means that the military can summarily execute anyone
                 who doesn't vote Republican.
           \_ Definition = someone who looks like psb
2006/7/11-14 [Health/Disease/General] UID:43633 Activity:nil
7/11    "It is not really a reversal of policy ... Humane treatment has always
        been the standard, and that is something that they followed at
        Guantanamo." -Tony Snow (July 11, 2006)
        Can someone tell me why the first sentence is an out-an-out lie?
        \_ According to the FBI: "On a couple of occasions, I entered
           interview rooms to find a detainee chained hand and foot in a
           foetal position to the floor, with no chair, food or water. Most
           times they had urinated or defecated on themselves, and had been
           left there for 18-24 hours or more. On one occasion, the air
           conditioning had been turned down so far ... that the barefooted
           detainee was shaking with cold.
           "On another occasion, the air-conditioning had been turned off,
           making the temperature in the unventilated room probably well over
           100 degrees ... The detainee was almost unconscious on the floor,
           with a pile of hair next to him. He had apparently been literally
           pulling his own hair out throughout the night.
           We also waterboard prisoners, which is pretty clearly not humane.
           \_ I believe the legal definition of "humane" is anything not
              leading to permanent organ failure and death, but they don't
              tell you that.
              \_ No, the White House has tried to claim that this is the
                 definition of "torture," but even that is BS. Various
                 courts have determined that waterboarding, sensory
                 deprivation, beating, etc are inhumane.
                 \_ "As you know, the term 'humanely' has no precise legal
                    definition." -Alberto Gonzales
                    http://balkin.blogspot.com/Gonzales.Kennedy.supp.pdf
                    (see question 15)
                    \_ Isn't this the same Gonzales that said the Geneva
                       Convention didn't apply to prisoners at Gitmo?
                       Why do you think he is the authority on anything?
                       \_ I'm agreeing with you.  My take on it is that humane
                          means nothing to our Attorney General, and therefore
                          "humane" is whatever is not torture, and as you
                          pointed out, torture is anything not leading to
                          organ failure / death.
2006/7/11-18 [Finance/Shopping] UID:43634 Activity:nil
7/11    Hi Im shopping for a new phone contract.  I want a cool phone.
        I'm also cheap.  What should I do?  Are there cool stuff
        on Amazon?
        \_ 1. what do you mean by "cool?"  do you want phone that looks good?
          ultra thin?  or you want your phone dubbed as a mp3 player? PDA?
          do you want MMS?  do you want download email, look up something
          on the web? and use your phone as a dial-up modem when no WIFI
          hotspot is available?
          2. you said you are cheap.  but you need to put things into
          perspective. Retail wise, a decent phone cost between $200-300.
          Cheap model cost about $100.  You will not find anything
          significantly cheaper than $100 unless you are willing to go for
          TCL or Bird.  Any decent PDA phone is going to cost you roughly
          the same as a cheap laptop.   Bare that in mind, you can think
          about how much a carrier is willing to subsidize, you can come up
          with a reasonable budget for a phone.
2006/7/11-18 [Recreation/Computer/Games, Recreation/Sports] UID:43635 Activity:nil
7/11    This is so cool:  Falling Sand game
        http://fallingsandgame.com  -John
        \_ That kind of rocks!  Thanks for posting, John.    -mice
        \_ About 5 years behind the times there, John.
           \_ Get a life, loser.
           \_ And still beautiful. How many things on the web can boast that?
           \_ I'll take that as a compliment.  -John
2006/7/11-16 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:43636 Activity:nil
7/11    Sort of an esoteric request:  I'm looking for an online collection
        of all the plates (ca. 900) from "Description de l'Egypte".  On the
        off chance anyone's heard of this and has an idea, mind pointing me
        towards it?  I'm not having much look on Google.  -John
2006/7/11-17 [Computer/SW/Security] UID:43637 Activity:nil
7/11    I'm working for a new company that is coming out with a web based
        product soon and we need to find good co-location facilites to
        host it. Can anyone recommend a good co-location facility in
        the south bay that can provide load balancing, backups, possibly
        SAN access, bandwidth on demand and has good peering?
        \_ you want the co-lo to provide the load balancing and storage?
           -shac
           \_ Possibly yes. This will be a one man show for a while so
              having some of the services managed would be nice and to
              lower the initial capital expense hit. Who does IGN use?
              \_ IGN is mostly at various Savvis colo's around the world
                 but we have all our own gear and storage. the only thing
                 we outsource is a fraction of our dba work. most of the
                 big companies dont outsource load balancing and storage
                 -shac
        \_ we use quest at work...
        \_ Not a recommendation, but check http://www.webhostingtalk.com
           You will get better response there and also do some search
           on a company's reputation.
        \_ might want to ask http://he.net
2006/7/11-12 [Reference/Law, Reference/Law/Court] UID:43638 Activity:nil
7/10    Scientists Question Nature's Fundamental Laws - Yahoo! News:
        http://www.csua.org/u/geg
2006/7/11-16 [Uncategorized] UID:43639 Activity:nil
7/10    Anyone have a picture of BIG4RENTS construction equipment
        "edited" to read BIG4PENIS? Dunno if it still happens, but it
        was common on campus ~5 years ago.
        \_ link:www.csua.org/u/geh
        \_ What about PENIS4RENT?
        \_ What about PENIS4RENTS?
           \_ What about PENIS4CUNTS?
        \_ Can't you just google for an image of BIGPENIS?
        \_ I do...I spent all last night looking through my archives of
           photos and could not find them though.  I will try again tonight.
           -scottyg
2017/09/21 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/21    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2006:July:11 Tuesday <Monday, Wednesday>