| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2007/12/18 [Reference/Religion] UID:48819 Activity:high 66%like:48825 |
12/17 Excellent article on religion in politics, tolerance, and multiculturalism.
http://urltea.com/2dwu [provenance not provided because not indicative.]
\_ instead of stuff like http://urltea.com, can't we use some sort of standard
command-line compressor/decompressor? Some reversible hashfunction.
Anyone know of a tool like that? |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Uncategorized] UID:48820 Activity:nil |
12/17 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22300698 All heil Swami the Magnificent! We're getting there the end of 2007 as he predicted a few years ago! \_ The Great Swami underestimated the literalness of the motd geeks. He thought that it was obvious that he was being tongue- in-cheek by predicting the exact moment of the end of the housing downturn. Even the Swami is not that all knowing. -GS |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Industry/Startup] UID:48821 Activity:nil |
12/17 Seeking advice for joining a startup. How to find a good startup
company outside of the Bay Area, what to look for in a company
(e.g. who are the VCs, management, etc), how to negociate for
stocks/options, etc etc. Thanks.
\_ Reconsider looking outside of the Bay Area/Silicon Valley. Read
this essay for by Paul Graham for some of the arguments why:
http://www.paulgraham.com/startuphubs.html
What to look for and how to negotiate is really strongly tied to
what phase the company is in which means knowing the answers to a
few key questions, including, Is the company funded? How much
funding/how many rounds of funding has the company taken and at
what valuation? How many employees does the company have? What
will your role be, i.e. rank and file, VP, or executive level?
Probably the most important question to ask if someone hands you an
options agreement is "How many shares outstanding?" If someone
offers you 10 shares out of 100 outstanding, that's 10% of the
company. This is absurdly better than someone offering you
1 billion shares when there are 1 gogol shares outstanding.
The best advice I can offer on finding a good startup is to ask if
you give a damn about what the company is doing. Are you willing
to sacrifice your nights and weekends for the next three, four,
maybe five years chasing a dream with your co-workers? If you can
answer yes, it's probably a good startup. -dans
\_ Luckily Paul Graham knows _everything_. I enjoyed his talks at
UCB but he does seem quite full of himself.
\_ You're obviously trolling, but I'll respond since you raise
a legitimate, albeit easily shot down, point. Well, that, or
you have the critical reading skills of a second grader.
Clearly Paul Graham doesn't know everything. Furthermore, he
has an agenda, the nature of which is pretty obvious, but he
does not come out and state it. I'm a little unusual in that
I would rather that a person have a clear (if unstated) agenda
than to pretend to be agenda-free. Basically, I don't trust
people who don't believe in something. I'm not a Paul Graham
or Phil Greenspun or Joel Spolsky sycophant, but I do read
what they have to say because they often make insightful
points. If you're going to discount them purely on the basis
of 'I think they're arrogant' or 'I don't like them', it's
your loss. Also, I don't think I need to go out on a limb
here to suggest that Paul Graham probably has more experience
founding, building, and selling a successful company than you
do, that counts for a lot, and gives him some right to be
'full of himself'. -dans
P.S. What part of 'some of the arguments why' do you not
understand? English motherfucker. Do you speak it? |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Reference/History/WW2] UID:48822 Activity:nil |
12/17 How to cross the border 101. Be as creative as you can. Vote
on your favorite answers:
\_ Operation Human Wave: Amass 1 million Mexicans on the borders.
On your mark, get set, CROSS! They can stop a few, but they
can't stop a million! Worked great in WW2, Vietnam and Korean War.
\_ Worked great at the end of the movie "Born in the West LA" too.
\_ Worked great at the end of the movie "Born in East L.A." too.
\_ Wear anti-infrared clothings. US Agents are known to use
infrared cameras at night time.
\_ Walk across like everyone else does. Bring a lot of water.
\_ Walk through customs along with all of the other tourists. Dress
nicely. |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:48823 Activity:nil |
12/18 Why is Bush pardoning all these people all of a sudden?
http://www.csua.org/u/ka2
\_ Why do dogs lick their balls? |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:48824 Activity:nil |
12/17 When the state comes to you for more taxes, remember how they're
spending your money right now.
http://www.knbc.com/news/14866201/detail.html
http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_7745781
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_7733735
\_ And software never goes over budget or over schedule in the
private sector, right? |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Reference/Religion] UID:48825 Activity:high 66%like:48819 |
12/17 Excellent article on religion in politics, tolerance, and multi-
culturalism.
http://urltea.com/2dju?weeklystandard.com
http://csua.org/u/kac [urltea has been flaky. -op]
\_ instead of stuff like http://urltea.com, can't we use some sort of standard
command-line compressor/decompressor? Some reversible hashfunction.
Anyone know of a tool like that?
\_ Would that significantly compress the URL given that we'd have
to stick to ASCII chars?
\_ I think in general you don't need huge compression, just
"enough". Just a thought anyway, I hate url shortening sites.
\_ Learn some information theory and come back later.
\_ I bet using UTF-8 would allow enough compression for
normal links. Even ASCII has lots of extra crap.
I'd rather not shorten them at all than use temporary
shortened links that won't remain valid.
\_ Pat Pat
\_ Um, are hash functions usually reversable?
\_ Not in the most typical use, but there are very many that are.
One hashing algorithm which is which you might not have
realised is encryption.
\_ No. But I was asking...
\_ Ah, a former- and now anti-Mormon writes about religion, slamming
Mormons in the process. By the Weekly Standard no less.
\_ I'm ignorant here. Is the Weekly Standard a leftie rag or a
righty rag?
\_ Righty.
\_ This does such injustice to the article. You're all troll hags. -op
\_ What is wrong with the usual url shorteners? How would a home
grown motd version be any different?
\_ Did anyone actually read the entire article? The analysis is quite
\_ Did anyone actually read entire the article? The analysis is quite
good, if you look past the lame jokes, and conservative POV. -op
\_ I actually read this very long and dense article that took me
over an hour to read and digest. He make some very good points,
over an hour to read and digest. He makes some very good points,
but I think he is wrong to claim that the GOP's inner debate
on religious tolerance somehow tars all of America with the
brush of intolerance. There will be a Jewish President, a Muslim
President and probably even a Mormon President someday. But they
will all be Democrats. The GOP has made itself into the Grand
Ole' Fundamentalist Party and its inability to nominate anyone
who is not a mainline Protestant is the inevitable result of that
choice. Perhaps it can unmake itself, but only after a long time
in the political wilderness of being out of power.
\_ I don't think he said the GOP's debate tars all. He said both the
(current) religious right and (current) multiculturalist left both have
(current) right and (current) multiculturalist, relativist left both have
it wrong. (and that Romney is a twink.) Then he laid out an excellent way
to objectively draw the line about what should be in bounds and what
should not. And I almost said which "religious subjects", but it's more
subtle than that, for good reasons. Thanks for commenting. -op
(current) religious right and (current) multiculturalist left
both have it wrong. (and that Romney is a twink.) Then he laid out
an excellent way to objectively draw the line about what should be
in bounds and what should not. And I almost said which "religious
subjects", but it's more subtle than that, for good reasons.
Thanks for commenting. -op
\_ Yes, he briefly and without too much evidence claimed that
multi-culturalism was just as bad as the Right's overt
pro-Christian bias. I know he was speaking to an audience
that probably already agrees with him, so he didn't feel
the need to make much of a case, but I think that:
1) multiculturalism is hardly monolithic on the left
2) multiculturalism as practiced in the United States
is not really significantly different than the more
traditional liberal virtues of tolerance that he espouses
I have heard that Europe is different, in that they are
making special exceptions for mostly Muslim immigrants
(except in France, which has a strong secular tradition)
and having a tough time integrating them (especially in
and are having a tough time integrating them (especially in
France, probably because they are trying harder there),
but I honestly don't have way to "reality check" these
but I honestly don't have a way to "reality check" these
claims. Here in the US, new immigrants are assimilating
all the time. Some groups better than others, no doubt, but
what is the out-marraige rate for Buddhists in this country?
For Jews? For Muslims? I am sure it is higher here than
anywhere else.
\_ I agree, but it seems clear he's talking about multiculturalism
in the US as preached and prosecuted (persecuted? :D), not as
practiced. Always a wide gap between the two in US, versus Europe,
because the left is large and in charge over there. |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Uncategorized] UID:48826 Activity:nil |
12/18 Ron Paul's earmarks
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/side2/4934728.html
\_ Why are you posting that?
\_ Because I heard about it. |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Transportation/Car] UID:48827 Activity:nil |
12/18 I just learned that there is such a thing as a car "roof scoop."
Basically, an air intake you put on the roof. They all appear
to be fake. Is there any car that actually uses a roof scoop to do
something useful?
\_ Yes. One of the race cars I drive has one. When I drove it at
Altamont this summer, we were grateful for every last bit of
ventilation we could get. I understand it's quite common on rally
cars. |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Health, Health/Disease/General] UID:48828 Activity:moderate |
12/17 $45 trillion gap seen in US benefits
http://www.newsweek.com/id/78426
\_ And their quotes come from... administration officials, R congs,
and a blue dog dem from TN... This is the "drown it in a bathtub"
crowd. How 'bout some mention of how we got here...
\_ 75% of this is Medicare. Socializing medicine would fix this
problem.
\_ How do you figure?
\_ Spending growth is out of control in the health care
sector primarily because the users of the system don't
see the true costs of their actions, and there are a bunch
of entrenched interests (primarily insurance companies and
drug companies, but also physicians) who are vested in
keeping it that way. The rising cost of delivery kills
everyone, including medicare. Those places that have a
single government payer have been able to ration health
care more effectively and keep a lid on cost growth. You
might be able to do it with a straight free market system
but I don't see that working here. One way or another, we
are going to have to reduce health care delivery costs in
order to handle the wave of boomers reaching retirement age.
\_ You think that having the taxpayers foot the entire
bill is going to help the users realize their true
healthcare costs? I argue the opposite. Socializing
medicine will make costs higher. Look at your own
example: Medicare. Eliminate Medicare and I guarantee
healthcare costs will go down.
\_ Except there is the counterexample of every other
country in the world that has nationalized healthcare.
They all pay less in overall costs, both in dollars
and as a percentage of their GDP.
People will gripe about the long wait times but I
trust the government to do a better job of rationing
than the "free" market, which would just let millions
die due to lack of basic care. Eliminating medicare
might make costs come down, but how many would die
do to lack of treatment? Is that really how you want
to ration healthcare: if you can't afford it, die on
street?
\_ For people who need expensive treatment to
stay alive, maybe they should just die if they
can't afford it. Everyone dies. Especially for
people who are older than say, 60: why should
we pay more than X to artificially keep them alive?
A lot of problems are caused by lifestyle choices.
\_ We are probably not as far apart as you think.
I think the cheap and easy preventative medicine
should be free and widely available and I think
the government should generally only pay for
well understood and relatively inexpensive care
outside of that. If you are 97 and you get
liver cancer, oh well you are going to die,
unless you can afford to pay for your own
treatment. But a total "free market" system
where poor people would have no access to
health care at all would be a disaster. Want to
to see whooping cough come back? Stop providing
free immunizations to poor children and it will.
That and a host of other formerly endemic diseases
and they will not conveniently only infect the
"unworthy of health care" poor.
\_ Not all charity should come from government
either.
\_ Current HSA plans allow patients to choose their healthcare
more carefully, keeping the money in a retirement plan if
it's not spent, thus injecting some direct competition.
Those seem to be working. I'd definitely prefer that type
of plan over socializing it. Romney's comment about Mass.
is that they had 7% uninsured. Out here in CA I suspect
it's higher than that.
\_ Yes there is a chance that something like an HSA could
inject enough consumer desire to reign in healthcare
spending. Is there evidence that is seems to be working,
as you say? The only way it could make a big enough
difference to significantly change things is if it was
extremeley widespread though. Would you support making
them mandatory?
\- you get to keep what you dont use from your HSA?
i thought they were all use or lose.
\_ http://www.hsainsider.com/Individual/Benefits.aspx
The HSA is a relatively new concept, you are thinking
of a different plan, called an FSA. |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Uncategorized] UID:48829 Activity:nil |
12/17 dans where / when is your justin.tv talk? I'm a big fan
of the dansification of the motd. Can I come to it?
\_ February 28th at the justin.tv offices. Schedule/details will
likely be posted here: http://www.justin.tv/hackertv/schedule
I'm pretty sure it's open to the public. -dans |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:48830 Activity:nil |
12/17 Toshiba builds a compact nuclear reactor:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2mg9n5 (nextenergynews.com)
\_ No control rod? Is there a way to stop the reaction and turn off
the generate when not in use?
\_ there's other ways to regulate reactions besides control rods.
some reactor designs use dampeners or reaction catalysts
dissolved into the cooling media. |
| 2007/12/18-29 [Finance, Finance/Investment] UID:48831 Activity:low |
12/18 Awesome juxtaposition of headlines:
Scientists fear Arctic thaw has reached 'tipping point'
and
Arctic Sea Ice Re-Freezing at Record Pace
http://www.climate-skeptic.com/2007/12/congrats-to-the.html
\_ Thank God. Once it tips can we stop hearing about this fraud
on working people everywhere? TIP! TIP! I want to hear about
global cooling for a few years (again).
\_ Tipping point meaning that after thawing a while now it will freeze
\_ Hey, global climate change skeptic: how about buying some
oceanfront property, maybe 2-3 feet above sea level,
oceanfront property, and maybe 2-3 feet above sea level,
somewhere?
\_ Why? Even the worst predictions of the IPCC say I'll be fine for
at least 100 years.
\_ so sea level's supposed to stay the same for 100 years and
suddenly jump? I don't think so...
\_ No, the worst predictions are 20cm rise in the next
century. So all I have to do is be at 2-3 feet and I'll be
fine for at least 100 years by the most alarming estimate.
But I expect the global warming hoax to be completely gone
in the next 5-10 years anyway.
\_ Then we'll be talking about global cooling and how
that is a man-made problem caused by C02.
\_ Are you going to aplogize to us all when you are
proven wrong?
\_ Are you going to apologize to us all when (okay, if)
you are proven wrong? |
| 2007/12/18-20 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:48832 Activity:moderate |
12/18 Can anyone explain why so many Republicans keep claiming that tax
cuts raise government revenue, even when they know it is not true?
http://www.csua.org/u/ka9 (WashPo)
\_ Because in a high-tax environment, it's true? Tax RATES aren't the
same as tax REVENUE.
\- yes, "everybody" acknowledges this may have been true
in say the eisenhower era, but it's disingenuous to imply
this holds true today.
\_ Well the relationship between tax rates and GDP growth
isn't an exact science either.
\- "we dont know what 'causes cancer' ... how can you
say smoking is bad for you?" "evolutionary theory
cant explain fainting goats ... so it's 'merely'
a theory just like ID is a theory."
\_ You are a tool for two exciting reasons! Firstly,
science is powered by scepticism, so it is never a
vice. Secondly, you seem to think economic
causal theories are as well understood as an
extremely well-studied medical special case.
-- ilyas
\_ when was the last time you took a shower?
anyone ever asked you that?
\- no, it is more like second guessing a
jury verdict .. it could be wrong, but
substituting your opinion when you dont
know any of the details of the case and
havent heard the arguments is crazy.
so maybe decrasing tax rates increases
revenue down to 10% MRT, but if 95% of
the econ profession believes revenues go
negative somewhere between 80 and 40%, it's
seems some linear combinaion of arrogant and
dumb to decide those arent the numbers you
\_ 'linear combination of arrogant and dumb',
that's a good one. I think I'll borrow it.
-dans
will operate with. even if there are a couple
of smart guys here and there who (sincerely)
disagree. i am not saying it is TRUE, i am
saying it is what you must operate on unless
you have some extremely heavyweight reason
why you dont. peter duesberg might have some
"heavyweight" reason to disbelieve the
HIV->AIDS theory but for Thabo Mbeki to
disbelieve it require some explanation
other than "well as a world famous biologist,
in my opinion, here are the flaws in the
science ...". There are some questions where
there are truely split opinions among
experts ... like say on the mechanism of
planet formation [http://tinyurl.com/37oy55]
[rumor is you are an expert on "the stars"?]
but supply side econ not such an example as
applied to the US today. you also seem to be
unaware of the different quality of certain
econ predictions. there are econ predictions
about certain equillibium conditions that
are not speculative because there are clear
forcing functions [arbitrage] ... so while
there might be lots of competing theories
about the level of exchange rates [CIP, UIP,
PPP etc] the cross exchange rate parity
prediction is a strong one.
(one more thing: yes science is powered by
scempticism, e.g. the H PILORI example, but
these pols and motd posters arent DOING
SCIENCE, they are running for office or
trying to justify a policy. they arent being
sceptical. they are usually lying and some
some small number there may be some other
expedient explanation.). -danh (the planet)
\_ That last bit is 'high priest thinking.'
You don't need to be Doing Science to be
a sceptic. Criticism isn't a privilege of
the knowledge producing class. Now it is
true most criticism/scepticism of any given
theory that DOESN'T come from scientists
themselves will generally be silly or
misguided. However, this isn't always so,
and it is very important that there remain
outside channels for challenging the current
status quo in science. This is because
science, for a number of reasons, is
particularly susceptible to 'mafia effects.'
-- ilyas
\_ This is all well and good, but it's
orthogonal to the point that supply-side
economics is believed to be bunk by the
economic establishment, and while it may
not have the imprimatur of of the COBE
experiment, it's pretty damned good
science. -dans
\_ That's pretty funny considering what
"imprimatur" means. -lewis, nihil obstat
"imprimatur" means. -psb
\_ imprimatur: Official
approval; sanction.
I guess I just can't do funny.
-dans
\_ Historically from the Pope
giving out an official decree.
\_ See also http://csua.org/u/kaa (New Yorker)
\_ It's called faith based government -- tax cuts raise government
revenues because we believe they do. Tax cuts also cure cancer
and bring endangered species back to life.
\- IMHO: "they" do it because "they" can get away with it.
\_ Post a link to your blog, windbag.
so the question degenerates to "why can they get away with it?"
well aside from "there is a sucker born every minute" [e.g.
people who believe stupid rhetoric about "death taxes" or
"double taxation" etc] type explanations [and remember, in
america in 2007 we have three people running for president
who can say "i dont believe in evoluation" and not be sent
who can say "i dont believe in evolution" and not be sent
packing on the hayseedmobile], i believe there are two
pathologies in american journalism that leads to the pols
not being called on this: 1. fear of having "access" cut off
if you say "candidate X is either a moron or a liar". 2. many
journalists are experts at "journalism", not a subject area.
so they are trained in things like "objective/neutral view
points", "presenting both sides" rather than having subject
matter expertise and being able to render judgements. now they
kind of research they may be good at is "digging up connections,
influence, following the money" ... or maybe digging up gossipy
thigns like who'se campaign is in trouble when they present the
things like whose campaign is in trouble when they present the
election as a horserace ... but they are not good at evaluating
substance in areas like climate science, economic science etc.
those are trickier areas than say evolution where the two
postions are morons and scientists ... so they probably do
positions are morons and scientists ... so they probably do
ok there. now the nice part of "america 2007" is the blogosphere
contains many people who are not journalists but ARE subject
matter experts. these people are much better at holding the
journalists and pols feet to the fire. but of course they dont
generally have the giant podium the MSM journalists have.
of course some exceptions: paul kurgman has a big podium
of course some exceptions: paul krugman has a big podium
[but he isnt a journalist. i know many journos kvetch about
the blogosphere, but to the complain about giving a plum
column to a non-journo? i am glad the NYT gave it to PK and not
some random liberal journalist.]. james suroweiki also an
exception. i think his finance coverage is really good. one
reason the e'ists science coverage is decent is they look
for "science people" who have some writing talent, rather than
a journalist to has some interest in science. i guess the one
thing that might be worse than the "silly objectivism" of
some journalists might the the ones that forget they are
journalists, like gary taubes' pronouncements about "fat
research".
\_ Why don't you ever post your name, unreadable screed guy?
-jrleek
\_ If you don't know that's partha, you have better things to
do than motd. How exactly is it unreadable?
\_ Massive wall of text, lost interest and skiped the rest
\- supply side economics -> wall of voodoo
about 10 lines in. This is the motd, not a novel.
\_ You are too short for this motd thread....
\_ I don't care if higher taxes raise or lower government revenue
over time. My goal is not to maximize government income. My
tax goal is to pay as few taxes as possible while getting the
minimum government services required to run the country smoothly
and safely. (And I didn't need an unreadable 2 page rant to
explain).
\- "what do people owe each other" merits a longer answer than
say "what is your favorite color". a personal statement of
perference is a different beast than the search for the
explanation to a normative or empirical question. you have
have offered a 6line reply, but "your tax goal" provides
neither insight into accuracy of supply side economics nor
its "cost free" adoption by all the R candidates.
\_ I think this is a good and admirable goal (and one that I
share) but I think we should have that discussion honestly,
not lie to the voters and claim that tax cuts are "free"
which is where the Republican Party is now.
\_ Ron Paul doesn't say this. It's not "the Republican Party"
it is those particular men who say this.
\_ Okay fair enough. But it is stated as true by all the
other candidates. There is some economic sanity left
in the Party, but you have to admit it is in the
minority these days.
\- Brad de Long [ucb dept econ] heavily covers the gap between
economists and pols on supply side econ. of recent postings,
see this "straight from the laffer's mouth" article:
http://delong.typepad.com/sdj/2007/12/justin-fox-on-a.html |
| 5/19 |