Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:October:12 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
 
WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ
http://csua.com/feed/
2007/10/12-15 [Uncategorized] UID:48295 Activity:nil
10/12   Bought a bunch of G at around 470, should I sell now?
        \_ No.  Never sell Google.  It can only go up.  Forever.
        \_ You paid 470 for ghb?  Dude, you got ripped off.
2007/10/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48296 Activity:nil
10/12   I am very curious... do people in USA actually think they have the
        moral high ground of accusing others for genocide?
        http://csua.org/u/jpq
        \_ Yes.  Oh, and today is the 12th of Oct.
        \_ Absolutely, and that doesn't negate our obligation to recognize
           injustices to Native Americans by our predecessors at the same
           time.
           \_ i am still waiting.
              \_ Dude, we let them gamble and they don't have to observe
                 state law.  It's a pretty sweet deal! ;)
                 \_ They can even declare themselves sovereign nations.
                    Exactly what it means by having sovereign nations within
                    the US, I don't know.
                    \_ Exactly.  As far as I can tell it means they have to
                       follow federal law, and that's about it.
        \_ Your logic: because the US was responsible at one time in the
           past for atrocities against the natives here we have no business
           telling people committing genocide today to stop.  Thank you for
           joining us today.  Maybe you'll have better bait tomorrow.
           \_ my logic is that the only reason why we stopped is not because
              we didn't feel it was the wrong thing to do.  We stopped because
              we've gotten what we wanted and these natives are no longer
              have any means to fight back.  ANd even today, USA never
              officially label these acts "genocide," nor have American
              produce any sort of remedy for such act (return some of their
              land?  monetary compensation?).  and now we are passing a bill
              labelling Turkey for doing the same thing?
              \_ Same logic: you did bad stuff so you can't point out when
                 other people do bad stuff.
              \_ The bill has no 'weight'.  Symbolic only.  At least in the US
                 most people would agree that we were pretty shitty to the
                 Indians.  The Turkish government completely denies anything
                 happened at all.
                 \_ Sounds similar to Germans vs. Japanese regarding WWII.
                    \_ You're over generalizing.  If anything, the Germans of
                       today accept MORE than their fair share of the blame
                       for WW2.  They won't shut up about how awful they were.
                       Boo hoo.  nationalist Japanese parties like to pretend
                       the barbaric excesses of the imperial army did not
                       happen, I'll give you that.
                 \_ The "weight" is that Turkey will become an enemy.
                    Currently, 70% of our supplies for Afghanistan and Iraq go
                    through Turkey's airspace.  This bill has been attempted
                    for over a decade.  Only now, when it will cut off the
                    supply lines to our troops are the Dems working on it.
                    \_ The Dems are building alliances around the world!
                       \_ While calling Bush terrible at diplomacy.
                          \_ Enjoying some crow with your Freedom Fries?
                             \_ Huh?
              \_ Native American tribes can run casinos in CA.  White trash,
                 n***er and Chinamen can't.
        \_ http://www.filibustercartoons.com/archive.php?id=20071011
2007/10/12-15 [Uncategorized] UID:48297 Activity:nil
10/11   See, the Patriot Act *is* working:
        http://caedefensefund.org
2007/10/12-15 [Politics/Domestic/Election, Politics/Domestic/Crime] UID:48298 Activity:high 52%like:48303
10/11   Clearly, the Nobel Peace Prize has a well known liberal bias.
        \_ Truth has a well known liberal bias as well.
           \_ Despite all the evidence!
              \_ http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm
           \_ Arafat won a peace prize too.
              \_ Arafat was a liberal?
                 \_ No, Arafat was the kind of brutal killer a certain brand
                    of liberals love to fawn over for some weird reason.
                    \_ You know that Arafat did not actually win the peace
                       prize himself, right? You do understand that it was
                       shared with Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin. Why, do
                       you imagine, the Nobel Comittee would award a peace
                       prize to a group of three people like that?
        \_ Oh of course.  I have to wonder what Gore has actually done for
           peace.  He made a movie with significant factual errors?  Wow.
           \- i'm not a big fan of ALGOR but he's a better choice than that
              dumb tree planting woman or rigoberta menchu, massive liar.
              the should have co-awarded it to BLOMBORG for "spearheading
              a debate on environmental change".
              \_ What does GW have to do with peace?
           \_ Let's time travel back to 1973 and have this discussion about
              Kissinger's award, mmmmmkay?
              \_ Name one war Gore stopped.
           \_ It is your opinion that the movie contains significant
              factual errors. A majority of climate scientists would
              disagree with you. It is pretty much impossible to make
              a documentary without any piddling errors. Do you believe
              in Creation Science, too?
              \_ Or in Al's case very serious errors.
                 \_ I notice you are avoiding the question.
        \_ If you look at the list of NPP winners over the last 30-40 years
           you'll find so many idiotic decisions that it is difficult for a
           rational person to take them seriously anymore.  It just doesn't
           matter.
           \_ Many rational people take them seriously. Perhaps you think
              that the Nobel Prizes don't matter, but if you do, you
              would be wrong.
              \_ Uhm yeah.  Well said.  Next up: I know you are but what am I?
              \_ 'Regular' Nobel prizes are very prestigious.  The Nobel Peace
                 Prize became a joke when Arafat won. -- ilyas
              \_ The conventional Nobel prizes are very prestigious.  The
                 Nobel Peace prize was a joke ever since Arafat won. -- ilyas
                 \_ In your opinion, which of course everyone in the whole
                    wide world shares. Do you honestly believe that your
                    opinions are mainstream, ilyas? -ausman
                    \_ "That's like, your opinion, man."  Why did you even
                       write that post?  -- ilyas
                       write that post?  No content. -- ilyas
                       \_ There is a very small group of pro-war people,
                          mostly people who despise any non-violent effort
                          at conflict resolution and whose livelihood depends
                          on warfare, who think that the Nobel Peace Prize
                          is "a joke." To the overwhelming majority of
                          humanity, it is a very presitigious award, perhaps
                          humanity, it is a very prestigious award, perhaps
                          the most prestigious award a human being can win.
                          There, is that better? -ausman
                          \_ Surprisingly, it is actually possible to
                             not take the Nobel Peace prize seriously, and
                             also NOT hate kittens.  The Nobel committee gave
                             the award in question to a known butcher, without
                             bothering to check if the 'agreement' would hold,
                             in the face of decades of similar agreements
                             failing to work.  Naturally, the 'peace' didn't
                             take, but you know.  Who cares about peace.
                             Would you support giving Kim Jong Il the Peace
                             prize?  The fellow runs a nightmare gulag state,
                             but I am sure he can sit down for a peace accord
                             too.  Especially if there is no requirement that
                             he keep his word.  Incidentally, did you know
                             that at least one Nobel committee member resigned
                             over Arafat?
                             P.S. Are you familiar with Larry Ellison's phrase
                             'Bozo explosion?'  It's a way in which startups
                             \_ Yes case in point Google. Start shorting
                                man, you'll thank me for it.
                             eventually succumb to inertia as they grow and
                             mature.  'Bozo explosion' is a general phenomenon,
                             it affects not just corporations but traditions
                             (consider the Olympic games corruption scandals),
                             non-profit orgs (consider what happened to LA's
                             Griffith Observatory), and apparently even
                             prestigious prizes.  -- ilyas
                             \_ You know, I am a pretty careful student of
                                Middle Eastern history and I have never before
                                heard of a Palestinian-Isreali peace treaty
                                heard of a Palestinian-Israeli peace treaty
                                that was signed by leaders from both sides
                                before. Can you give me some more information
                                about this treaty? As for your confused notion
                                about constitutes a prestigious or important
                                prize, I will say that historical figures almost
                                always seem more important after they are dead.
                                I am sure the award to MLK was pretty
                                about what constitutes a prestigious or
                                significant prize, I will say that historical
                                figures always seem more important after they
                                are dead. I am sure the award to MLK was pretty
                                controversial in 1964, as well. -ausman
                                \_ Are you comparing Arafat to MLK now?  Wow.
                                   Prizes are a social signal, nothing more.
                                   The process by which prizes are awarded is
                                   a noisy one.  If this process gets so noisy
                                   that 'obviously bad people' get the prize,
                                   the prize is no longer a meaningful signal,
                                   e.g., "This prize recipient is a good
                                   person/productive contributor, etc. ...
                                   unless we happened to fuck up and the person
                                   is actually a murderer/thug/moocher/
                                   political stooge."  Bad award decisions
                                   reflect on the award, I am afraid. -- ilyas
                                   \_ I notice you are unable to provide me with
                                      any similar peace treaty, in spite of your
                                      earlier claims to the contrary. You are
                                      aware that the Nobel Peace Prize is an
                                      international prize, right? And you are
                                      aware that Arafat is one of the most
                                      highly regarded people ever in the Arab
                                      world, right? I personally do not regard
                                      Arafat as on the level of MLK, but would
                                      not be surprised if he is by most people
                                      in twenty or thirty years: it all depends
                                      on how the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
                                      works itself out. I think that Rabin and
                                      Arafat took great personal and political
                                      risks to come to an agreement, which they
                                      should be commended for. Rabin was
                                      assassinated for it, as was Sadat a decade
                                      earlier, for daring to come to a similar
                                      accord. Remember, there are still a bunch
                                      of fanatical peace hating extremists on
                                      both (many?) sides in the ME, who are
                                      willing to kill leaders on their own
                                      side who try to come to a peaceful accord.
                                      Did you approve of the assassination of
                                      Rabin and Sadat? Want Arafat and Peres
                                      assassinated?
               \_ Let's see: Linus Pauling, Martin Luther King, UNICEF,
                  Andrei Sakharov, Amnesty International, Anwar Sadat &
                  Menachim Begin, Mother Teresa, Lech Walesa, The UN
                  Peacekeepers, Nelson Mandela & Fredrik De Klerk,
                  Medecins Sans Frontieres. What a worthless bunch!
        \_ Yeah, we need a Nobel War Prize, so some Republicans can win some.
        \_ What I find sad about this is that there *had* to be someone out
           there who has actually done something about making the world a
           more peaceful place instead of turning the prize into a political
           award for correct behavior.  How many truly worthy people were
           passed over to give Al a hat tip?
           \_ Name one.
           \- BTW, it's not only the Peace prizes with a mixed record.
              The Lit prize is criticized for poor choices too.
2007/10/12 [Politics/Domestic, Computer/Companies/Ebay] UID:48299 Activity:nil
10/12   Awesome.   http://csua.org/u/jq0
        \_ What is awesome about Limbaugh trying to rewrite history?
           He tries to do that all the time.
2007/10/12-17 [Recreation/Humor] UID:48300 Activity:nil
10/12   I thought this xkcd was funny
        http://xkcd.com/263
        \_ I like this one: http://xkcd.com/327
        \_ We've been through this.  tom says xkcd is not funny so xkcd is not
           funny.  Unlike you and I, when tom speaks, he is not making
           subjective observations about the world, he is stating the one and
           only objective truth, and you'd be a moron and a fool to believe
           otherwise. -dans
           \_ xkcd is not funny.  --tom #1 Fan
        \_ Neither of those are remotely funny. - !(tom || dans)
           \_ This probably isn't either: http://www.xkcd.org/322
2007/10/12-14 [Finance/Banking] UID:48301 Activity:nil
10/12   Oh crap Etrade's savings account teaser interest rate went from
        5.05% to 4.70% in less than 1.5 month. Who else has a higher
        savings/mm interest rate?
2007/10/12-19 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton, Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:48302 Activity:high
10/12   Awesome.   http://csua.org/u/jq0
        (ebay auction of... oh, who cares, it's partisan crap disguised as a
        short url.  Op, did you happen to see your dignity on auction while you
        were there?)
        \_ Actually it's about accuracy, and Reid's inability to find it with
           both hands.
           \_ Actually, it is about Rush Limbaugh's attempt to rewrite history,
              something he does all the time. Where are his transcripts of him
              calling Chelsea Clinton the "White House Dog?"
              http://mediamatters.org/items/200709270010
              See where he calls them "phony soldiers."
              \_ Yeah, http://mm.org has been arguing against the truth for quite a
                 while.  Limbaugh clearly was talking about actual phony
                 soldiers.  See "Operation Stolen Valor".  Limbaugh went on to
                 talk about McBride and others like him.
                 talk about Macbeth and others like him.
              \_ I heard it live, in context.  He was clearly not turning
                 his back on 20+ years of pro-military rhetoric.  Reid and
                 http://mm.org got it wrong.  The only way they could get it so
                 wrong was by intentionally ignoring the facts.  Rush is
                 an amusing entertainer and not worthy of this sort of
                 waste of time on the Senate floor nor a ridiculous witch
                 hunt.  Especially since he's said plenty of other things
                 worth attacking that he's actually said.
                 \_ Another "phony soldier" no doubt:
                    http://www.csua.org/u/jq2
                    Rush only calls you a phony if you don't support
                    Bush's war.
                    \_ If you ever actually listened to Rush you'd know he's
                       said many times that he has no problem with real
                       soldiers being critical of the war.  Just the fakes
                       and frauds like the guy he was talking about that day
                       who flunked out of basic but falsely claimed to be a
                       US Army ranger who committed and witnessed numerous
                       atrocities.  You're tossing a red herring.  Reid is
                       a liar.  Media Matters (a Hillary created front org)
                       are liars.  The other 40 Senators who signed his
                       stupid letter are liars.  If you want to bash Bush or
                       the war, go ahead, but that has nothing to do with
                       Reid, Hillary, and the rest flat out lying about what
                       Rush said and wasting Senate time attacking a US
                       citizen's first amendment rights.  Have a nice day.
                       \_ First off, what proof do you have that the first
                          caller was a phony soldier, which is what Rush
                          clearly called him? Secondly, Media Matters is
                          hardly a Hillary created front org, it was founded
                          by David Brock, someone I personally know from
                          my time at Wired Magazine and it is funded by
                          Soros. As usual, you are either confused or
                          spreading misinformation.
                          Soros. As usual, you are spreading misinformation.
                          \_ The first caller was a phony soldier?  What are
                             you talking about?  I don't think you know.
                             Secondly, Brock is a Hillary minion.  Your knowing
                             him personally has nothing to do with anything.
                             Of coruse Hillary didn't fund it herself.  No one
                             said she did.  Sheesh.  Either way, Reid and MM
                             are still liars.  All this other stuff is
                             nonsense.
                             \_ Brock is hardly a Hillary minion, unless you
                                really believe that everyone to the left of
                                Mitt Romney is part of a vast Hillary
                                conspiracy. If anything, he is a Soros minion,
                                since Soros writes his paycheck. And Soros
                                is quite a long way from Hillary, believe me.
                                \_ You failed to answer about the first part
                                   about "first caller was a phony soldier".
                                   You don't know anything about this story.
                                   You're just a troll.  The rest of your
                                   post is nonsense.
                                   \_ In a simple reading of what Rush said,
                                      it is quite clear that he referred to
                                      the first caller as a phony soldier, yes.
                                      Your English language skills are
                                      deficient. You also don't know what the
                                      word "troll" means. Hint, it does not
                                      mean "anyone who disagrees with me."
                                      \_ sorry, I was listening to the show,
                                         not a cut up transcript.  He was
                                         clearly not referring to the caller.
                                         The rest of your ad hominem is not
                                         worth replying to since it is based
                                         on your complete lack of knowledge
                                         of the situation.
                                         \_ Calling someone a troll is fine,
                                            but saying "you don't know what
                                            a troll is" is ad hominem? You
                                            don't know what ad hominem means
                                            either.
                                \_ To both of you: Please show evidence that
                                   Soros or Hillary in any way financially
                                   supports MM.  "Drudge says so" is not
                                   evidence.
                                   \_ Sorry, I mistakenly thought this was
                                      common knowledge. It is pretty funny
                                      to watch the Right foam at the mouth
                                      over MM. They have been doing the
                                      same stuff for years, but they get
                                      seriously paranoid and nutty when
                                      anyone gives them a dose of their
                                      own medicine. Where does MM get its
                                      funding?
                                      \_ "common knowledge" to who? Ditto-
                                         heads? Answer your own question then
                                         come back and show us your results.
                                      \_ I've donated to them.
                                         \_ I've wasted money on stuff before,
                                            too.
                                            \_ Well, they seem to get you all
                                               hot and bothered, so it wasn't
                                               a total waste, now was it?
                                               \_ *laugh* the first troll who
                                                  is paying others to do it
                                                  for them.  You've taken the
                                                  Art Of Troll to a whole new
                                                  level.  Keep sending money.
                                                  Wow, you're dumb.
                                                  \_ Do you really think that
                                                     this is the *first* troll
                                                     to ever do that? What do
                                                     you think of Horowitz
                                                     and FrontPage Mag?
                                                     \_ I don't donate to
                                                        Horowitz or FPM or
                                                        MM or any other troll
                                                        orgs.  Why would you?
                                                        \_ You are begging
                                                           the question. Is
                                                           MM the *first*?
                                                           \_ Of course it
                        isn't but that is a side show.  Who cares which was
                        first?  I don't and have never donated to any of them.
                        Why would anyone donate to orgs who by their very
                        nature are designed to lie and created with that
                        purpose in mind?   Maybe that's your thing but I'll
                        send my charity to places that try to do good in the
                        world.
                        \_ Surprisingly enough, not everyone agrees with what
                           your definition of "do good in the world" means.
        \_ I'm sad anyone takes Rush seriously, ever, or pays any attention
           to him.
           \_ Talk to Reid about that, wasting time in the Senate on an
              entertainer.
        \_ ugh debating anything Rush spews is stupid.  http://MM.org is a Soros
           creation, not hillary.
           \_ From Rush to Drudge...  Can't you people factcheck anything?
              The zombie lies will never die...
           \_ Hillary herself said she helped create http://MM.org.  Here is the
              article, with a download of the audio of her saying it.
              http://csua.org/u/jqa
              \_ First off, this is not really what she said there, if you
                 pay attention carefully to the wording. She said she supports
                 it, which can mean practically anything. Secondly, do you
                 honesly believe every lie that a politician tells you?
                 Did you believe Dubya when he told you that Saddam had
                 WMD and a Nuclear program? Did you believe Gore when he
                 told you that he invented the Internet? The actual founder
                 of MM is famous for having written various anti-Clinton
                 pieces, including the Troopergate story (which was later
                 exposed as a lie, which was part of what led to Brock's
                 "conversion").
                 \_ So we have to carefully parse her words to figure out wtf
                    she's talking about?  Does she know what the meaning of
                    "is" is or was the previously resolved in court?  Sheesh.
                    \_ Politicians say bland, impenetrable things all the time,
                       deliberately using the ambiguity inherent in language
                       to tell the greatest number of listeners what they
                       think they want to hear, without actually saying
                       anything. Hillary is just better at it than most.
                       \_ I suppose it depends on what the meaning of "it" is.
                          I prefer leaders, of which we have a few, over your
                          politicians.  Saying she is a politician and there-
                          fore it is ok for her to dissemble is not ok.  You
                          might as well vote for Bush.
                          \_ I think it is obvious that I am no big fan of
                             Hillary either, but I don't see any of these
                             "leaders" running for President, from either
                             party. You might be able to convince me otherwise
                             with regards to McCain. Anyone else even
                             remotely close?
                             \_ Among the 'top candidates' as chosen by the
                                media, no, not really.  There are others
                                running we barely hear from.  Maybe there.
                                \_ Who?
                                   \_ Ron Paul, Huckabee, Dodd, and Gravel
                                      come to mind.  Hillary is an evil clown,
                                      Obama is a clown,  Rudy is evil, Edwards
                                      is a fraudster, Romney will say anything.
                                      I miss anyone at the top?
                                      \_ Huckabee talks out both sides of his
                                         mouth with regards to taxes, Dodd is
                                         bought at paid for by Wall Street, but
                                         bought and paid for by Wall Street, but
                                         perhaps the other two are all right.
                                         I don't know much about them except
                                         what I saw on the debate. They are
                                         both obviously willing to take
                                         upopular stances openly, so you have
                                         to respect that.
                 \_ ObBitchSlap: Gore never said he invented the Internet.
                    \_ Created vs invented
                       \_ "The Internet would not be where it is in the United
                           States without the strong support given to it and
                           related research areas by the Vice President in his
                           current role and in his earlier role as Senator."
                          -Vincent Cerf
                          \_ Because it behooves him to embarass the VP by
                             saying anything else?
                             \_ Because it's true.
                                \_ So you say.  What exactly did Gore do
                                   without which we wouldn't have google
                                   today?
                                   \_ High Performance Computing and
                                      Communication Act of 1991 which led to
                                      the National Information Infrastructure.
                                      Learn the history of your field, young
                                      Computer Scientist.
                                      \_ 'If it had been left to private
                                         industry, it wouldn't have happened,'
                                         Andreessen says of Gore's bill, 'at
                                         least, not until years later.'.  So,
                                         without Gore, we would be just like
                                         now but circa 2002?  With google,
                                         yahoo, web mail, browsers, etc, but
                                         no web 2.0 ajax outside of MS web
                                         outlook?  How is that different?
                                         You know the net existed then right?
                                         So he did something that eventually
                                         funded the browser a year later?  It
                                         sounds like the browser was already
                                         on it's way.  I'm not buying it,
                                         sorry.
                                         \_ this is one of the dumbest trolls
                                            I've ever seen.  -tom
                                            \_ why do you still post here?
                                         \_ Heh, w/o CCA and NII, we'd be
                                            just like ten years ago, but with
                                            BBSs. OTOH, we'd probably have
                                            kickass analog modems.
                                            \_ Hint: there was an internet
                                               before 1991.
                                               \_ Yes, and Usenet, and other
                                                  such, and you had to have
                                                  access through a school or
                                                  large company to get to it.
                                                  W/o public investment in
                                                  expanding access, you'd still
                                                  have to have an OCF account
                                                  to read your email.
                                                  \_ And as Andreesen said,
                                                     we'd be a few years
                                                     behind.  Call it five.
                                                     That puts us at 2002
                                                     which isn't a whole lot
                                                     different than today.  Or
                                                     maybe you're smarter than
                                                     he is.  We all know that
                                                     without government
                                                     nothing ever gets
                                                     invented.  Government is
                                                     the source of all
                                                     creativity and invention.
                                                     *boggle!*
                                                     \_ you're an idiot.
                                                     \_ Andreesen said "years
                                                        later": that could
                                                        mean decades. Also,
                                                        if not for gov. invest.
                                                        there'd've been no
                                                        .com bubble and no
                                                        commesurate boost in
                                                        private spending in
                                                        infrastructure. Prog.
                                                        w/o profit is slooow.
                                                        \_ the dotcom bubble
                                                           was a good thing?
                                                           ok whatever.
                                                           \_ It led to near-
                                                              ubiquity of the
                                                              Internet. I'd
                                                              say that's more
                                                              good than bad.
                                                              \_ I'd say it
                                                              didn't.  I'd say
                                                              more computers in
                                                              more homes did
                                                              that.
                                                     \_ The proto-Internet was
                                                        ARPAnet, run by the
                                                        DOD, and the DOD
                                                        decided it was no
                                                        longer going to
                                                        provide support for
                                                        civilian applications.
                                                        If the Internet
                                                        did not receive
                                                        funding at that point
                                                        in time, maybe
                                                        telecoms would have
                                                        done something, but
                                                        it would have been
                                                        done based on
                                                        the telecom model;
                                                        fee for service,
                                                        screw net neutrality.
                                                        The government is the
                                                        *only* entity which
                                                        could have created
                                                        the Internet as the
                                                        public resource we
                                                        know today.  -tom
                                                        \_ fee for service got
                                                           you... here it
                                                           comes....
                                                           SERVICE!  What a
                                                           shocker!  imagine
                                                           having a business
                                                           model where you
                                                           have to pay to get
                                                           stuff!  Dreadful!
                                                           \_ What are you, a
                                                              Free Market
                                                              troll, a ditto-
                                                              head troll, or
                                                              a bridge-troll?
                                                              \_ Anyone who
                                                              disagrees with
                                                              you must be a
                                                              troll.  You are
                                                              the source of all
                                                              truth.
                                                              \_ Man, took you
                                                                 long enough.
                                                           \_ Do you think the
                                                              Internet would
                                                              be better if it
                                                              worked more like
                                                              cell phone
                                                              networks?  -tom
                                                              \_ For some
                                                              definitions of
                                                              'better', yes. If
                                                              I could pay $5/m
                                                              to not get spam
                                                              I would save
                                                              money, for ex.
                                The telcos would sell you "spam  _/
                                blocking service" and then sell the
                                spammers "spam delivery guarantee
                                service" to get around the spam
                                blocking.  You'd have to buy a
                                specific computer to connect to AT+T's
                                network and it wouldn't work if you
                                wanted to switch to Sprint, and you'd
                                have a two year contract with a
                                penalty clause.  You'd also have a surcharge
                                to send mail to an off-network customer, or
                                it just wouldn't work at all.  The "cheap"
                                connectivity plan would involve huge fees for
                                any time you actually used the service, and
                                then they'd advertise "Tired of high fees?
                                Buy our unlimited plan for twice as much
                                money!"
                                Net neutrality and ubiquitous deployment is
                                a huge public benefit, and it could only
                                have happend through government action, and
                                Gore deserves a lot of credit for initiating
                                that action.  -tom
                                \_ You mean like how I can use my cell phone
                                   right now to call anyone and it doesn't
                                   cost me anything during nights and weekends
                                   and during the day the rate is dirt cheap,
                                   I don't get spam calls, I have a choice of
                                   hundreds of phones, and all this was brought
                                   to me by pure raw capitalist competition for
                                   my hard earned dollar.  Yeah, the phone
                                   system sure sucks.  If it was run by the
                                   government I wouldn't have a cell phone,
                                   unless I was a Senator or someone else
                                   'important' who gets a special health
                                   plan much different than what the proles
                                   get.  No thanks.  I'll pass on the socialist
                                   utopia phone system monopoly.  I'm old
                                   enough to remember Ma Bell being the only
                                   game in town.  A government monopoly on the
                                   phones would be no better.  Competition
                                   rules.
                                   \_ Uhh, you do realize that without the
                                      government heavily regulating large
                                      chunks of the phone industry your
                                      wonderful cell phone network would
                                      be a disaster, don't you?
                    \_ The actual quote was "During my service in the United
                       States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the
                       Internet."  which Declan (another Wired Alum) twisted
                       into invented.
                       \_ Hence "Created vs invented" as I said above.
                             \_ Brock is hardly a Hillary minion, unless
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2007:October:12 Friday <Thursday, Saturday>