Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:March:01 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2007/3/1-3 [Computer/HW/CPU, Computer/HW/Scanner] UID:45842 Activity:nil
3/1     Backup MX servers: should I have one (y/n, given that most isps
        spool mail for a couple of days), and if so, how should I go about
        having one (are there commercial backup MX servers, and if so,
        how much?) - linxu
        \_ Yes, you should have one.  You're right that most ISPs spool
           mail for a couple days, but the situation where I've found a
           backup MX server to be most useful is when I relocate a mail
           server.  I'd be happy to run a secondary for your domains on
           my box if you'll do the same for me, assuming, of course, we
           don't share the same upstream provider. :)  See also:
           Probably one of the best, most elegant anti-spam measures anyone
           has come up with in years. -dans
2007/3/1-3 [Recreation/Dating, Health/Women] UID:45843 Activity:moderate
3/1     While we're talking about sex, I just want to give you a datapoint:
        I've been having bareback sex for many years and have not gotten
        any girl pregnant. The secret is knowing WHEN not to have sex.
        \_ "bareback" usually refers to gay sex, or butt-sex, so, maybe
            it's not too surprising you haven't gotten anyone pregnant?
            \_ Have you heard of a BBBJ? What do you think the "BB" is
               referring to?
               \_ I never heard this before.  What's BBBJ?  BareBackBlowJob?
        \_ That, or you're infertile.
           \_ Or they've had an abortion or used Plan B w/o telling you.
              \_ Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner!
            \_ Actually I read a paper that said that when trained on the
               rythym method (including taking temperature regularly, etc etc)
               test subjects had less unwanted pregnancies than with most
               other forms of birth control.  That being said it's kind of
               a pain in the ass to follow the full method and does
               require training.
        \_ Note the recent study that showed the prevalence of HPV among women
           (as high as 45% among young women).
           \_ Note that HPV has nothing to do with pregnancy.
        \_ -1 not funny.  Troll harder. -dans
2007/3/1-3 [Computer/Theory] UID:45845 Activity:nil
3/1     UW-Madison Number-theorists finally derive Ramanujan mock theta
        \_ "What made mock theta functions all the more inscrutable was the
           fact that the first few pages of Ramanujan's letter were lost.
           Those pages may have contained more clues, ...... All those secrets
           died with Ramanujan just two months after he wrote the letter,"
           This sounds so much like Fermat's Last Theorem.  Coincidence, or by
           This sounds so much like Fermat's Last Theorem.  Coincidence, or on
2007/3/1-3 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:45846 Activity:high
3/1     Science v. Faith:
        \_ This is especially funny considering the religion of Global Warming.
           It's got everything including the sale of indulgences (carbon
           offsets), silencing of critics, etc.
           \_ except in the case of global warming, the idiots are the
              ones on the outside.  -tom
                 \_ So what is the big deal about global warming anyway?
                    Its not like the world has never been more warmer
                    than it is now. Besides, what is really the problem
                    w/ a warmer world? More beach front property? Fewer
                    days you need to wear a sweater? Uninhabitable places
                    like Canada become ever so slightly liveable? Really,
                    I just don't see how anyone can get all worked up this,
                    when there are so many more important things to think
                    about in this world like Ubuntu vs. Debian, if Duke
                    Nukem will ever ship and whether the Transformers the
                    Movie is going to be a HUGE disappointment.
                    \_ a) it's not about the world now, but what it could
                       become in the coming decades. these things aren't
                       instant. b) global climate change can lead to massive
                       disruptions and deaths. you're pretty ignorant.
                       \_ What about precession? Have you been around
                          23K years?
              \_ Good thing all the ones "inside" aren't idiots.
              \_ Yes, that is the standard response by the faithful.
              \_ Sure, people like Dr. Roy Spencer are idtiots.
              \_ Sure, people like Dr. Roy Spencer are idiots.
                 \_ Spencer is a big advocate of intelligent design and a
                    lackey for the right.  -tom
                 \_ Woah!  I'm glad I clicked on that link.  I was expecting
                    some typical Bjorn Lomborg style hottair horseshit, but this
                    was actually a good article.  I think he falls into the very
                    trap he accuses other climate scientists of when he claims
                    that "our climate seems to have a 'preferred' average
                    temperature, damping out swings beyond 1 degree or so."
                    I even the mickey-mouse crowd like Lomborg are willing to
                    admit the existence of ice ages in the Earth's past, and
                    that climate events of that scale would be devastating
                    for our civilization.  His understanding of the dynamics
                    tells him that there's more longterm stability than we
                    know there to be looking at well-established climate
                \_ Requiring proof beyond doubt that CO2 emissions lead to
                   climate change is stupid.  The consequences of climate
                   change far outweigh the economic pain of a switch to
                   greener erngy.  Being proactive is the only reasonable
                   \_ So you agree with the premise of Pascal's wager?  What
                      religion did you join?
                      \_ One can believe in Pascal's wager and Hume's
                         theological bet without running off and joining an
                         organized religion.  The difference is that
                         (competent) scientists who make statements about
                         global warming are making empirical claims which are
                         falsifiable.  I am not aware of any organized relgion
                         that makes falsifiable claims about its deity.  If
                         you know of such a religion, let me know, otherwise
                         you're just presenting a straw man.
                         P.S. On an unrelated note, it's good to see that now
                         that tom is back he is as easily baited as ever. -dans
                         \_ I'm not aware that anything about Global Warming is
                            falsifiable.  It's quite ad hoc and seems to not
                            take into account very important things, including
                            Dr. Spencer's comments about weather.
                            \_ Of course global warming is falsifiable; measure
                               drops in average temperature, increases in
                               glacial/polar ice.  Spencer's opinion has
                               been thoroughly discredited.  -tom
                               \_ Please point me to where I can verify that
                                  he's been discredited.  Also, show me what
                                  theories about global warming say about cloud
                                  \_ (dans, please stop "helping")
                                     \_ Fuck off.
                                        Your hating on me, just shows how good
                                        I am. -dans
                                        \_ Good?  Hating?  Please.  If you're
                                           going to imitate me, at least get
                                           the details right.  Good is a
                                           weakass wanker's adjective.
                                           Hating/Hater are the province of
                                           the likes of tjb.  Besides, it's
                                           easy to get tom to hate on you.
                                           \_ Also, your imitator's posts are
                                              nowhere near long-winded enough
                                              to be authentic-looking.
                                              \_ Point.  Imitators should
                                                 be sure to duplicate my
                                                 tendency for verbal diarrhea.
                                     His mode with global warming is exactly
                                     the same as with intelligent design;
                                     make broad comments with no real backing
                                     that jibe with what Rush Limbaugh's
                                     listeners want to hear, and make outright
                                     lies about existing research.
                                     The IPCC report is a good place to start
                                     if you're really interested.  I assure
                                     you that climate scientists are quite
                                     aware that sometimes it's cloudy.  -tom
                                     \_ Tom, in your honest opinion, is the
                                        IPCC report a readable document?
                                        \_ I don't think it's a document
                                           designed for laypeople, if that's
                                           the question.  -tom
                                     \_ Actually, he addresses the temperature
                                        of the lower atmosphere. His critics
                                        say that he hasn't tweaked the raw data
                                        the right way.  Not exactly convincing.
                                  \_ Sorry buddy, you don't get to play that
                                     game.  Saying, wah wah, I'm too lazy to
                                     do research so you need to prove
                                     everything to me beyond a shadow of the
                                     doubt or I won't believe you is in
                                     effect, saying 'I don't understand the
                                     scientific method, and I don't know what
                                     falsifiability means.'  You and I both
                                     know, that you can always keep saying,
                                     'Sorry, I'm not convinced, give me more
                                     evidence or you're wrong.'  You're
                                     welcome to say that, just don't expect us
                                     to let you participate in meaningful
                                     discussions if you want to play the 'How
                                     many angels can dance on the head of a
                                     pin.' game. -dans
                                     \_ I'm doing no such thing. I'm actualy
                                        asking for some reference that claims
                                        to discredit Spencer.
                                        \_ Backpedal away monkey boy!  So you
                                           do realize that even good
                                           scientists can support and believe
                                           in bad ideas.  Does this mean
                                           they've been discredited?  On the
                                           bad idea, yes, as scientists and
                                           researchers not really.  cf. the
                                           tenured professor(s) at Berkeley
                                           who claim AIDS isn't caused by HIV.
           \_ This is especially funny considering the genius of George Dubya.
2007/3/1-3 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Japan] UID:45847 Activity:high
        What kind of scientific study needs to kill 860 whales a year?  Is it
        the "In Search of the Best Tasting Whale" study?
        \_ Pretty much.  Although personally, I don't see anything wrong with
           eating non-endangered whales.
           \_ And I don't see anything wrong with eating people (the least
              endangered mammal on the planet), I can see, though, how
              reasonable people may be agin' it. -phuqm
               endangered mammal on the planet), I can see, though, how reasonable
                people may be agin' it. -phuqm
              \_ Can we start with you?
           \_ I thought whales are endangered, and that's why there is control
              on whaling.  No?
              \_ I'm too busy to look up the economist article right now, but
                 many species of whales are no longer endangered.  (If they
                 ever were, not sure).  Anyway, the Japanese want to hunt the
                 Minsk whale, which is not endangered.  However, there now
                 seems to be some sort of whale cult that is against all
                 whaling, period.
                 \_ I see.  Thanks.
                 \_ Question for you, do you think it is o.k. to
                 \_ Question for you, do you think it should be o.k. to
                    eat Chimps and Bonobos ?
2007/3/1-2 [Uncategorized] UID:45848 Activity:nil 80%like:45857
3/1     The elderly among us will appreciate this
        \_ Did you mean the Roy Rapoport reference?  Or Singer the untalented
           \_ Someone piss in your coffee this morning?
2007/3/1-3 [Reference/Tax, Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:45849 Activity:nil
3/1     If you bought a Prius in 2006 don't forget to subtract $3150
        for the credit! Get all the forms and info here:
2007/3/1 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:45850 Activity:nil
3/01     ---------------------------------------------------
        < 1.8  20:52:40 37.897N 122.112W 13.8 Lafayette, CA >
                .,ooOOOOOoo  .
                .oOOOOOOOOOOOOO le...
                 oOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO lllllee...
                   OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO llllllllllllle...          .,,;
                    '*OOOOOOOOOOO llllllllllllllllllleeeee`;,:,,;.
                                        `""*elllllllllllll::`'," ;
                                       `      ``""elllllll: :`;'.,
                                                  `le@@eee; "':`'"
                                                     ~@@@@@~  ;';'
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:March:01 Thursday <Wednesday, Friday>