Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:March:19 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>
Berkeley CSUA MOTD
2008/3/19-21 [Finance/Investment] UID:49495 Activity:nil
3/18    Fed cuts the interest rate by another 3/4% and saves the
        housing market. Moral of the story: BUY THAT HOME NOW!
        Bush promises to make the economy good no matter the cost!
        \_ PS: US to Yen went from 120 to 98 from 2007 to now.
2008/3/19 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49496 Activity:high
3/19    Not a peep about Obama's speech?  Just yesterday one of the
        techs at the colo was saying "Shit, did you hear about Obama's
        pastor?  It's gonna be Rodney King all over again..."  Seriously,
        I don't get people.  Are they really more scared of race riots
        than the banking sector imploding?  Is a sermon given a year ago
        by a retiring pastor more important than the war?
        \_ Scroll down to "Obama's pastor speech".
2008/3/19-21 [Science/Physics] UID:49497 Activity:moderate
3/19    This is one of the funniest xkcd's I've seen
        \_ This xkcd is not funny.  This is one of the funniest xkcd's you have
           ever seen.  Therefore, you do not like laughing.        ^
           \_ You're an idiot                                      |
              \_ O WAU YR RITE                                     |
                 \_ Yes, this is the level of the argument of the gp.
        \_ MythBusters is totally bad science.  The kind of bad science that
           leads to "proving" theories that are completely invalid.  XKCD
           is wrong wrong WRONG about this one.
           \_ You are precisely the kind of person Zombie Feynman would
              \_ My problem is not rigor.  My problem is tests that don't
                 disprove the hypothosis.  Hypothosis is "can x be done".
                 The test is "can I do x via method y".  That may doesn't
                 disprove "can x be done".  (Basically I'm sick of know-it-alls
                 telling me mythbusters proved something doesn't work
                 when mythbusters did no such thing.  People aren't learning
                 to create tests and verify, people are learning "trust
                 the geeks on my tv".)
                 \_ How would you disprove "x can be done"?
                    \_ You can't.  But you go do a lot better than "Can we go
                       faster than the speed of light?  Well we built a really
                       cool rocket car and it only got to 300mph, so we are
                       going to say NO!"
                       \_ Wow, with strawmen like that I can see how you're a
                          much better thinker than the MythBusters.
                    \_ Well, it is probably impossible to show that in an
                       absolute sense most X cannot be done or some phenomenon
                       X is impossible.  The best that one can hope for is that
                       if X was possible it would violate the known laws of
                       Re Mythbusters - I think they pick things that can be
                       disproven/proven for pratical purposes via a reasonable
                       experiement. I think of it as a first approximation,
                       rather than the final proof. Sometimes an approximation
                       may "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts"
                       as much as a final proof will.
                       \_ I'm sorry, they are bad science.  0 controls.
                          Multiple independant variables.  This kind of
                          stuff matters and isn't hard to get right.
                          Why don't they?
                          \_ They routinely have controls.  So you don't watch
                             the show, eh?
                          \_ When did they ever call themselves scientists?
                             They're special effects engineers putting together
                             an entertaining program.  Seriously people...
                             And the XKCD isn't putting them forth as
                             scientists either.  Whatever you're arguing is
                             missing the point.
                          \_ Okay, so they are engineers rather than scientists
                             :-). In any case, the presenters are doing
                             "science" in that they are are verifying claims
                             via experiment, albeit very crude and imprecise
                             experiments. Sure you can probably do a better,
                             more precise experiment, with controls, &c. But
                             it would probably be far less entertaining.
                             If you want rigor, watch Nova.
                             \_ Didn't Nova do a huge string theory special?
                                  -- ilyas
                                \_ Well, they had a big 2 hour special
                                   with Brian Greene based on "The Elegant
                                   Universe." I think they have had a few
                                   shorter shows on loop quantum gravity,
                                   string/m-theory, &c. with Neil deGrasse
                                   Tyson. Most of the Nova episodes re string
                                   or m-theory have included some discussion
                                   that the theory may not be physics b/c it
                                   is untestable.
                                   \_ I don't remember Nova string theory stuff
                                      being anything other than a huge
                                      cheerleading PR thing for string theory.
                                        -- ilyas
                                      \_ Hmm. I recall the string theory pgms
                                         as being mostly cheerleading, but not
                                         totally one-sided. Also there was a
                                         program on LQG, which, I think, is a
                                         different, testable, theory that
                                         unites GR and QM w/o all the kookiness
                                         of string/m-theory.
                                   \_ Who is more anoying, Brian Greene or
                                      Neil deGrasse Tyson?
                                      \_ Not sure, but Samantha Carter recently
                                         said that she thinks Neil deGrasse
                                         Tyson is hotter.
                 \_ You're blaming Mythbusters for stupid people.  They're
                    pretty good at narrowing their focus and explicitly saying
                    what that focus is.  Instead of mental wanking (like people
                    asking about a plane taking off from a treadmill), they
                    actually try it.  That *is* valuable, and that's precisely
                    what Zombie Feynman's point was.  It's also a really good
                    shot at string theorists.
                 \_ Mythbusters isn't trying to prove that it impossible for
                    X to be done by any method. I think it is fairly obvious
                    from the show that the presenters pick the methods most
                    likely to accomplish X and then show whether X can be
                    accomplished via those methods. If it turns out that X
                    cannot be accomplished via the methods selected, then
                    the presenters conclude that it is unlikely that X can
                    accomplished. Although it is not a rigorous proof that
                    X cannot be accomplished at all, the demonstration can
                    be considered a sufficient approximation for most purposes.
                    The show can also be considered to as "educational" in the
                    sense that it teaches people to disbelieve claims that
                    cannot be demonstrated via experiment.
                    \_ Ack this is just bull. Something either is, or isn't.
                       You're either with us, or against us, it's as simple
                       as that!
                       \_ Does this pass for humor in your circles?
2008/3/19-21 [Uncategorized] UID:49498 Activity:nil
3/19    Mike Huckabee on Jeremiah Wright
2008/3/19-21 [Recreation/Shopping] UID:49499 Activity:nil
3/18    Two close friends of mine had a kid recently.  What is a good present
        for the boy that isn't clothes.  Around $80-$125.  Clothes ok if not
        something outgrown immediately.
        \_ Glider/Ottoman combo:
           --- yuen
2008/3/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/RepublicanMedia] UID:49500 Activity:nil
3/19    If Ann Coulter had live-blogged the Gettysburg Address (
2008/3/19-21 [Uncategorized] UID:49501 Activity:nil
3/19    Holy cow, it's blojo!
        \_ Wow, way to go, Jon!
        \_ HellPeacock!
2008/3/19-21 [Politics/Foreign, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iraq] UID:49502 Activity:nil
3/19    McCain's foreign policy bumbling
2008/3/19-21 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Troll/Aspolito] UID:49503 Activity:low
3/19    It always amazes me how people on soda are willing to casually talk
        about hurting people who disagree with them (aspolito on wall today).
        \_ Thanks for your concern.  -- !aspolito
        \_ It always amazes me how much people on soda totally miss the point.
        \_ Hi ilyas.
           \_ Fail. -- ilyas
              \- If richard perle were to be laying in the road bleeding
                 tp death, I'd like to think I'd let him die. I thik I could
                 do that. If he were laying in the road covered with gasoline,
                 I'm not sure I could drop a match on him.
2008/3/19-21 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:49504 Activity:moderate
3/19    The Swiftboating of Obama begins in earnest: (
        Has it really come to this?  Again?  Are we really going to have a
        campaign that's a replay of 2004?  Are there any adults left?
        "Idiocracy" is starting to look like prophecy.
        \_ Oh no! Some one posted a video critical of a politician on youtube!
           Send him to the gulag!  Fairness doctrine!
        \_ Oh no! Some one might tell the truth about a politician in a hotly
           contested election! Quick! Smear the opposition!
           \_ "the truth"... Uhhuh...  Are you one of those people holed up
              waiting for ObamaBinX to launch his racial holy war?  RAHOWA!
              ATTACA!  Fuck off.
              \_ Bad troll!  No cookie!  Back to your content-free cage!
        \_ Wow, 38,000 whole views. And I bet 99% of them were all rabid
           GOP partisans. Yawn.
           \_ actually, the article we all came from to view it, was
              critical of it.  I expect a large portion of the views are
              from people who are pro-obama, and the video will change
              approx. 0 of their minds.  It is actually pretty weak, I
              doubt it will become a big item.
              \_ A McCain aide was just suspended for pushing it:
              \_ It what way is that article critical of the YouTube clip?
                 It seemed mildly congratulatory, to me.
        \_ Yeah, it was pretty poorly done.  Of course, the combo of
           "Just words?" and "God Damn America!" was pretty obvious.
2008/3/19-21 [Recreation/Humor] UID:49505 Activity:nil
3/19    Steve Jobs introduces a new product: iRack
        \_ not funny                                    -emarkp
           \_ Ironically, I think it *is* funny, and I'm also the guy who
              thought that was funny. -emarkp
              \_ but we already knew that Mormons have no sense of humor.
                 \_ The issue is not whether he's a Mormon or not. The
                    issue is that he has Asperger's Syndrome.
        \_ Probably not funny to the 30% of the population that still
           thinks that invading Iraq was a good idea. The rest of us
           are amused.
        \_ I thought the idea was funnier than the execution.  The comedic
           timing was pretty weak.  Although the final joke was well done.
2008/3/19-21 [Transportation/Car] UID:49506 Activity:moderate
3/19    Does anyone know a decent pro-bono auto accident type lawyer
        in the bay area?  I was almost killed, my truck is in a million
        pieces, and people are starting to send me bills for
        this. I'm thinking of suing my insurance company for
        incompetence at the very least.
        \_ Excuse me, why do you need a truck in this world? I mean,
           are you a construction worker? Do you NEED a truck?
           \_ good troll.   I think.  I'm sorry your life is so boring.
              Also... I don't have a truck anymore!  see above.
              \_ I think the point is you aren't gonna get pro-bono work
                 for a wrecked truck.  It's not that vital.
                 \_ AND THEN?
        \_ Pro-bono?  Are you destitute?  Try a lawyer on a contingent.
        \_ This is not the kind of case lawyers typically take pro-bono.
           You can complain to the California Consumer Protection Agency
           about your insurance company and also the BBB.
        \_ You can probably find an attorney who is willing to take your
           case on contingency. Normal contingencies are in the range of
           20-35% of whatever recovery you get.
2022/01/25 [General] UID:1000 Activity:popular
Berkeley CSUA MOTD:2008:March:19 Wednesday <Tuesday, Thursday>