Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:March:23 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2007/3/23-27 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:46063 Activity:nil
3/23    "Iran nabs British sailors in Iraq waters"
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070323/ap_on_re_eu/british_troops_iran
        War against Iran is coming.
        \_ War is coming because Iran just committed an act of war?
2007/3/23-27 [Science/Space] UID:46064 Activity:nil
3/23    What exactly is heavy water, how do you get it, and how does it
        produce the bomb? I keep hearing about Iran and heavy water but
        I have no chemistry fu and I don't understand how you can magically
        turn water molecules into the bomb.
        \_ Heavy water is D2O instead of H2O.  What is "D"?  It's just
           hydrogen with an extra neutron in it.  D2O has less neutron
           absorbtion cross-section, so reactors which use D2O as a moderator
           have more neutrons available for longer.  SPECULATION:  Because
           more neutrons are available for longer, perhaps it's possible
           to convert more U238 into plutonium in the reactor, which
           is prime bomb-making material.  END SPECULATION.  Deuterium is
           also a component in the more powerful hydrogen bomb.
           \- there is nothing special about heavy water. it is just
              norweigian propaganda. it was the voss water of the 1940s.
              it's kinda like what norweigan VOSS WATER is today.
              all this talk about fast and slow neutrons is just
              marketing. --radiation lab employee
              norweigian propaganda. it was just a 1940s drink that became
              popular in germany. it's kinda like what norweigan VOSS WATER
              is today to with the paris hilton crowd. all this talk about
              fast and slow neutrons is just viral marketing chain reaction.
                   --radiation lab employee
              \_ The PSOs are on their way to your office as you read this.
2007/3/23-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46065 Activity:kinda low
3/23    L.A. Times leans right.  Notice how the top 3/4's of the story spews so
        much irrelevant chaff, focusing on how Reagan/Clinton/Dubya fired
        most/all attorneys when they came to power.  Only toward the end do you
        get:  "When you have a transition between presidents - especially
        presidents of different parties - a U.S. attorney anticipates that you
        will be replaced ... the unwritten, No. 1 rule ... is that once you
        become a U.S. attorney you have to leave politics at the door."
        http://tinyurl.com/2na94k (latimes.com)
        The perversion of truth -- especially the willful, disingenuousness
        attitude that permeates the Republican Party today -- disgusts me.
        \_ I think most politicians are like that. Except guys like Nader
           who cannot get elected.
        \_ Seriously, do you really believe one party is all beauty and nice
           and the other the sole benefactor of all evil?  They are the same.
           The Democratic party is absolutely in no way shape or form ethically
           or morally superior to the Republicans.  You have one party with two
           names.  And btw, how dare the LAT actually tell it's readers that
           all USAGs expect to be replaced?  Let's not tell anyone anything
           that might soften the political damage to the evil Bush even if it
           is the truth and relevant to the story.
           \_ Answering your first two lines: No. I think both parties are
              guilty of stupidity and petty politics designed to keep them-
              selves in power; this is the nature of our current political
              system. That said, the Bush Admin has done so in a much more
              blatant and egregious manner. I expect corruption, but I would
              prefer some decorum and a modicum of circumspection along the
              way. The current firings are simply insulting. -!op
              \_ You have Democratics currently in office in positions of
                 great power, even holding Chair positions who were caught red
                 handed in bribery scandals, in land scams, in having $90k in
                 cash stuffed in their fridge, using the IRS to punish
                 political enemies, etc, etc, ad nauseum.  Don't come on here
                 and try to tell me the Bush Admin is more blatant and
                 egreious about anything.  I don't find bribery, theft, fraud,
                 and fridge stuffing to be less corrupt or more circumspec or
                 providing more decorum than what the Bush admin has done with
                 the USAG firings.  In comparison the USAG thing is trivial BS
                 and I find it ridiculous and insulting anyone cares *at all*
                 about this compared with everything else going on in *both*
                 parties.  Do any of the things I mentioned about the Dems
                 upset you at all?  Or would they only be worth mentioning if
                 they were Republicans?  And hey, how about stuffing that Iraq
                 funding bill with Democratic pork?  That's cool, too, huh?
                 Take off the blinders.
                 \_ What part of "both parties of are guilty of stupidity and
                    petty politics" and "I expect corruption" didn't you get?
                    Jail anyone, Dem, GOP, or Ind. who's engaged in corruption,
                    bribery, or abuse of power. How can your outrage over
                    Dem corruption not spill over into the arena of egregious
                    abuse of the US Atty system to punish political enemies?
                    Before pointing out the mote in my eye, howzabout dealing
                    with the beam in your own?
                    \_ The part where you find firing a few USAG worse than
                       stuffing $90k in your fridge *and* *still* *keeping*
                       *your* *seat*.  I'd like to see a URL that says why
                       they were fired and not from a NYT op/ed piece.  Show
                       me a reliable source that says they were fired for not
                       punishing political enemies.  You continue to weigh
                       (R) ethical violations much heavier than (D) ethical
                       violations even when the actual events don't match up
                       like that.  Example: Which is worse ethically?  Canning
                       a few prosecutors who server at your whim and aren't on
                       the same political page (and understood the deal when
                       they accepted the job) or stuffing bribe money in your
                       fridge as an elected representative of the American
                       people at the highest levels of government?  Go ahead
                       and say the fridge stuffing isn't as bad and we can stop
                       right there.  The firing is just hard ball politics and
                       although unfortunate for the guys sacked, TS.  It's a
                       political event.  The fridge stuffing is a felony.  How
                       is that investigation going, huh?  It's not.  The guy
                       will be in office until he retires 'honorably'.  *That*
                       is truly sickening.
                       \_ For the love of G_d, get this: They're both bad.
                                          \_ of what now?
                                             \_ "God".  for some level of
                                                orthodoxy among jews, to
                                                write the name of god on
                                                anything that might be erased,
                                                destroyed, damaged, etc, is
                                                profane.
                                                \_ But God is not the name of
                                                   god.
                                                   \_ ...than to open it and
                                                      remove all doubt.
                                                      \_ KNEEL BEFORE YAHWEH
                       \_ For the love of YAHWEH, get this: They're both bad.
                          I appreciate that you're frustrated that the fridge
                          investigation has faltered (and yes, it should be
                          investigated fully), but it's not being held up
                          just because Congress is investigating Presidential
                          abuse of power (i.e., firing USAtys for not pursuing
                          political opponents). If fridge-stuffer is guilty of
                          accepting bribes, jail his ass. If AG fired the US
                          Atys because they wouldn't persecute the opposition,
                          can his ass. Also, didn't the FBI say they had
                          Jefferson on video taking a bribe? Then they should
                          arrest him for it! Right now, there appears to be
                          more evidence of dickery in the White House than in
                          Jefferson's fridge!
        \_ I guess I don't understand why this is a story.  Almost every
           president fires all the attorneys and replaces them with their own.
           W decides to just replace a few.  Therefore W is bad?  huh?
           \_ He decided to replace a few on the basis that they weren't using
              their power to hound and harrass the political opposition. An
              across-the-board replace wouldn't have raised eyebrows;
              demanding loyalty oaths to The Leader is another thing entirely.
              \_ Why do you think they normally fire them all?  To get loyal
                 ones. Duh.  I see no difference.
                 \- a company can close a plant and open one a town over.
                    but they still cant fire all the black people.
                    you are allowed to hire who you want. you can
                    fire them for incompetence or if they are not
                    "getting with the program" but the program cannot
                    be political prosecutions. a second issue is the
                    be partisan prosecutions. a second issue is the
                    "cover up". at this point there is probably nobody
                    guilty of a legal crime in the executive branch, but
                    certainly people can be tried in the court of
                    public opinion for being mendacious, unprincipled
                    sacks of shit. it is reasonable to hypotheteize
                    "ALBERTO has made the DOJ a wing of the white
                    house" ... i think people are free to hold that
                    against BUSHCO just like they are free to hold
                    CLINTON being a serial adulterer against him.
                    much of this turns on the relatively simple distinction
                    between political and partisan. the doj can have
                    poltical priorities like going after sodomites and
                    drug fiends instead of antitrust, but it cannot be
                    a partisan enforcer like a party whip of chairman who
                    withhold appointments or $$$ from you. this is not
                    an especially subtle argument.
                    \_ I guess you're welcome to hold it against him if you
                       like. Seems pointless to me, there are pleanty of
                       actual things he's done wrong to hold against him.
                       Your "firing the black people" analogy is obviously a
                       completely false analogy.  But, still.  You think it's
                       morally superior to fire everybody, then only rehire
                       white people?  I would argue the opposite.  If you only
                       want to get rid of a few people, don't make everyone go
                       through the unemployment ringer.
                       \- you cant hire "only white people". yes, i commented
                          early on it is odd congress is fixating on this
                          when there is katerina incompetence, iraq
                          incompetence, not catching osama, the plutocrati-
                          zation of society etc. at least w.r.t. to the
                          iraq war, congress feels they have "clean hands"
                          here. and of course the dems are in agenda control.
                          you're also caught in the "93 > 8" mentality.
                          \_ No crap.  You also can't only fire black people.
                             That's why this is a false analogy, as I noted.
                             Also: So, 93 < 8?  Must be that "new math." :)
                             \_ Obtuse little fucker.
                       \_ I don't think it's morally superior. It think it's
                          Better Form. It implies an understanding that the
                          appearance of propriety, while not sufficient in
                          and of itself, is necessary.
                          \_ Another way to say this is "The first is easier
                             to prove."  I can't argue with that, I just don't
                             see any moral difference.
                             \_ Out of curiousity, so you see a moral diff
                                between this and, oh, using postage to send
                                mail out as Socks the Cat?
                                \_ Had to look that one up.  Yes, there's a
                                   difference. I can't see anything wrong at
                                   all with using postage to send out mail as
                                   "Socks the Cat."
                                   \_ Okay, then what about the christmas card
                                      list "scandal".  That warranted 140 hours
                                      of testimony UNDER OATH to determine that
                                      nothing improper happened.  Is there a
                                      moral difference between that possible
                                      impropriety and this?
                                      \_ Seesh, are you just going down a list
                                         a dem talking points, trying to prove
                                         I'm some rep stooge?  I can't even
                                         find this story, just dem blogs
                                         whining about it.  I never said the
                                         lame-o Rep attempts to get Clinton
                                         were ok, so get off it.
                                         \_ Are you saying, though, that the
                                            firing of the USAs was proper, and
                                            therefore should not be looked
                                            into?  That's what you seem to be
                                            saying with "I guess I don't
                                            understand why this is a story."
                                            I think you may be too short for
                                            this discussion.
                                            \_ Sheesh, sorry I'm too young for
                                               you.  Somehow pulling out old D
                                               talking points I don't recall
                                               that then saying I'm too "short
                                               for this discussion" seems
                                               amazingly lame though. I'm done.
                                            \_ I'm saying the firing was
        standard enough politics to not be worth looking into.  I don't like
        hardball politics to begin with, so I'm not going to say firings were
        'proper,' but they aren't unusual.  The Dems are playing lame-o gotcha
        games with Bush, just like the Rs did with Clinton.  Niether case was
        worth the time and money.
        \- do you know what united states attorneys do?
        \_ So do you prefer the last 6 years of 0 oversight out of congress?
           What you call "gotcha games" is what most people call "Congress's
           job".
        \_ They were unusual _because_ they were firings singling out very
           specific individuals on the basis of "performance issues" after all
           8 received good evaluations. The LCD here is suspect. And then
           they're unusual in that the AG lied in his testimony on the subject.
           \_ We've come full circle, just read from the top for replies to
              these posts.
                             \_ I think that the difference in morality
                                between two different acts of corruption is
                                a complicated matter of ethics that has been
                                wrestled with for thousands of years.
        \_ Let's see if the American people agree with you or not. I think
           the Democrats obviously think they have a winner here or they
           would not be pushing so hard.
2007/3/23-27 [Computer/SW/Languages/C_Cplusplus] UID:46066 Activity:nil
3/23    In C#, are there pre-defined strings for class names and method names,
        like __FUNCTION__ in C?  Thanks.
2007/3/23-27 [Politics/Domestic/California/Arnold] UID:46067 Activity:nil
3/23    http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2007/04/02/8403410
        An interview with the Governator. "Does the GOP get this [global
        warming]?  No. There are people in both parties who don't get it,
        but I would say I have a tougher time selling those things to
        the Republicans."
        \_ Arnold- expert climate scientist
        \_ Of course, if you're a Republican most likely the belief "maximum
           growth forever" is encoded somewhere in the lowest layers of your
           brain.  Anything that challenges that belief is automatically
           rejected like tissue from a donated organ ... Just like trying to
           convince an evangelical Christian about the validity of evolution.
           Facts are useless.  This is true regardless of whether human
           caused global warming is true or not -- it just can't be true even
           if it is true.
           \_ A corrallary is that Republicans tend to be against federal
              spending and subsidies, unless said federal spending creates
              a direct benefit to them - c.f. "Cadillac Desert" and the
              history of water development in the American West.
           \_ Wow, neat!  You have a URL that backs that up?
              \- i am not an above poster, but "the records" clearly show
                 at the federal level divided vs single party rule is a
                 better predictor of spending than "ideology. i dunno if
                 DD > RR or RR > DD [probably varies by admin], but RD and
                 DR < RR, DD [where DR = dem president, rep congress].
                 it might be interesting to see if "structure over ideology"
                 holds true over all the states or if in some states ideology
                 wins out, say goldwater legacy in AZ etc. ok tnx. --psb
2007/3/23-27 [Computer/SW/Security, Computer/SW/Unix] UID:46068 Activity:nil
3/23    hey root can you turn 'PINGS' to soda.csua back on?
        thanks
        \_ Hey, root, can you disable this h0zer's motd-editing cron-job pls?
        \_ and what's up with crippling traceroute?  It needs setuid to
            function.
            > traceroute scotch
            traceroute: icmp socket: Operation not permitted
2007/3/23-27 [Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:46069 Activity:nil
3/23    Another type of hybrid car: engine + compressed air:
        http://www.theaircar.com
2007/3/23-27 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:46070 Activity:nil
3/23    http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070323/economy.html?.v=9
        Realtors report Feb 07 existing-home sales increase 3.9% from Jan 07.
        Fine print:  Feb 06 - Feb 07, 3.6% drop nationwide, West down 9.6%.
        Fine print 2:  Jan 07 was so bad it made Feb 07 look good.
        Fine print 3:  Raw numbers (not seasonally adjusted), Jan 07 - Feb 07
          saw a 6.5% drop for the West
2007/3/23-26 [Recreation/Dating, Recreation/Interesting, Recreation/Media] UID:46071 Activity:nil Cat_by:auto
3/23    Best CAPTCHA ever
        http://hotcaptcha.com
        \_ wow this rules.
        \_ is it just me, or is the 'male' version
        \_ is it just me, or is the 'male' version broken.
           \_ It is just you. Though the author has kind of a strange idea
              as to what constitutes a "cute guy." Think twink.
2007/3/23-26 [Uncategorized] UID:46072 Activity:nil
3/23    So why no Terror Alerts lately?  Is it because they stopped regularly
        torturing new "confessions" out of KSM?
2007/3/23-27 [Industry/Jobs] UID:46073 Activity:low
3/23    My boss just gave his 2 weeks and his boss is freaking out a bit.  What
        is the ideal amount of time to wait before asking for a raise?
        \_ Are you going to ask your boss or his boss?
           \_ His boss.
        \_ Don't ask for a raise.  Ask for his job and salary (which is almost
           certainly at least 35% higher than yours).  Explain how you're
           prepared to take over, ready to move up, solve problems, and the
           time is right.  The one thing all managers want to hear is that
           someone else has solved their problem for them.  Be that solution.
           Don't be the money grubber who adds to his woes asking for a raise
           with the implied threat of quitting if you don't get it.
           \_ I agree with the ask for your bosses job part, but you are
              kidding yourself if you think the average manager makes at
              least 35% more than their line subordinates. 15-20% is more
              like it.
              \_ I think this depends on many variables. I do know that
                 I saw my old boss' paycheck once and he made 35%
                 more than I did at the time and I was one of the higher
                 paid people underneath him. A lot depends on your
                 organization, though. Some have 40 levels of management
                 and in some you report directly to the CEO.
                 and in some you report directly to the CEO. I doubt
                 my current boss makes 35% more than I do, but she's
                 relatively inexperienced. I had a really senior manager
                 once who charged to some of my tasks and based on
                 the burn rate he made a lot more than 35% more than I
                 did. He had been in his job for 40+ years and I think
                 his high salary was one reason he was the casualty
                 of a layoff.
              \_ In year 2000 I (engineer) made $90k and my immediate boss (VP
                 Engineering in a startup) made $150k.
                 \_ Do you think it is typical that a line engineer is
                    supervised by a VP?
2007/3/23-27 [Recreation/Dating] UID:46074 Activity:nil
3/23    Why does this make me so uncomfortable:
        http://generationsoflight.com/generationsoflight/html/PurityBall.html
        \_ Maybe it's this line:
           "Would you pledge your virginity to your father?"
           http://www.generationsoflight.com/generationsoflight/html/News.html
        \_ I bet half of its members are also members of NAMGLA.  Why else
           would they keep the moms out of the process?
2007/3/23-25 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/China] UID:46075 Activity:nil
3/23    Chinese Burning Man
        http://jonlogan.phanfare.com/album/208729
        \_ How do the Chinese keep from getting frostbite when they run
           around naked and high on all that ice?
2007/3/23-27 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:46076 Activity:nil
3/23    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1805580/posts
        "a 'dramatic shift' in political party identification since 2002, when
        Republicans and Democrats were at rough parity. Now, 50% of those
        surveyed identified with or leaned toward Democrats, whereas 35%
        aligned with Republicans."
        Do we need to reweight polls with the updated party identification #'s?
        \_ Don't forget the I's, which are growing quite a bit.
2007/3/23-26 [Recreation/Food/Alcohol, Recreation/Food] UID:46077 Activity:nil
3/23    Wow, German judge approves wife-beating based on Koran
        http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070322/wl_afp/germanyjusticeislam_070322132641
        \_ Anyone have background on this?  Sounds like the judge is playing
           provocateur.
        \_ And in other news in the march of Sharia, Target has some cachiers
           who won't ring up pork products.
           http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/news/breaking_news/16925919.htm
           \_ I don't understand why anyone would be this afraid of pork.  The
              Korean says don't eat it, not fear it.
              Koran says don't eat it, not fear it.
           \_ Is that the same Target where fundie pharmacists refused to
              dispense birth control?
2007/3/23-27 [Reference/Law/Court] UID:46078 Activity:nil
3/23    "WASHINGTON - Attorney General Alberto Gonzales approved plans to fire
        several U.S. attorneys in a November meeting, according to documents
        released Friday that contradict earlier claims that he was not closely
        involved in the dismissals."
        http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news_update/20070323_ap_documentsshowgonzalesokdfirings.html
2007/3/23-26 [Uncategorized] UID:46082 Activity:nil
3/23    Is mail down?  I cannot receive/send any mail.
2017/09/20 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
9/20    
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:March:23 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>