| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2008/3/24-27 [Transportation/Car/RoadHogs, Transportation/Car/Hybrid] UID:49546 Activity:nil |
3/24 X Prize for 100mpg vehicles: http://www.csua.org/u/l3w I think the 100mph requirement for the mainstream category is too high. Something like 85-90mph will be more useful. OTOH I think it should add a crash test requirement to that category. \_ Put up your own prize money. |
| 2008/3/24 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:49547 Activity:high |
3/23 Raise your hand if you don't know what motdedit is or why you should
use it.
And/or: Why does the motd seem to travel back in time?
\_ Raise your hand if you don't care about motdedit.
\_ motdedit is for the weak. we've been over this.
\_ The time travel thing is the result of censor/restore wars. |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Reagan, Politics/Domestic/President/Bush] UID:49548 Activity:nil |
3/24 An honest dialogue about race
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=9955
\_ I see very little honesty there. |
| 2008/3/24 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:49549 Activity:nil 97%like:49553 |
3/24 Oops, biofuels are worse re greenhouse gasses
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/03/24/ap4806595.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120631198956758087.html?mod=googlenews_wsj |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49550 Activity:kinda low |
3/24 Wow, you'd think with all that experience, Hillary wouldn't be such a
bad liar (re: visit to Bosnia).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=It6JN7ALF7
\_ The press covered for Hill&Bill for 15+ years. They didn't have
to be good liars. They got busted all through the 90s but mostly
the press ignored it. Now that the press is leaning heavily to
Obama, they are showing the world what the Clintons always were
and cover for Obama instead. All very amusing.
\_ The primaries will never end. I suspect Hillary and Obama will be
gearing up for their 3000th debate right around the Inauguration
of McCain.
\_ ALGOR is going to settle this by becoming the nominee.
\- Must not destroy Robot.
\_ She doesn't actually kiss the little 8 year old Bosnian girl.
She just makes a kissing motion but presses her cheek against
her.
\- This really has gone beyond "spin" and exaggeration to lying.
\- This really has gone beyond "spin" and exaggeration (ALGOR &&
the Internet) to lying:
On Bosnia, see:
http://tinyurl.com/2k8yxg [wapo]
On Northern Ireland, see:
http://tinyurl.com/2ff9xe ... this time not a comedian,
but a Nobel Prize winner.
http://tinyurl.com/2ff9xe
(this time not a comedian, but a Nobel Prize winner)
This kind of thing is beyond "mere sleaze" like this:
http://tinyurl.com/2sbrjo
I know this is really long [20min], but it is a much more
eloquent and cogent version of "why i [psb] hate hillary clinton"
than i could put together:
http://lessig.org/blog/2008/02/20_minutes_or_so_on_why_i_am_4.html
It's about a month out of date but still very worth listening to,
particularly if you have come to appreciate "character matters"
It's about a month out of date but still very much worth listening
to, particularly if you have come to appreciate "character matters"
in who you vote for, rather than just the policy bundle [which a
lot of ex-BUSHCO supporters have come to realize]. I strongly,
strongly, strongly encourage any fence sitters of good conscience
to watch that [if you have both feet on the Hillary side, I dont
have much to say to you]. --psb
\_ Some girl who wants to ***** my ***** out is for Hillary.
so I'm for Hillary.
\_ Thanks for posting the url though. I wonder if I can find
an Obama girl...
\- one reason the anti-abortion nutjobs and are powerful
beyond their numbers, is they are spending their friday
nights and sat afternoons agitating, while "apathetic"`
younger people are out tring to find people to ***** their
***** out. but supposedly people can combine activism and
socializing in the obama campaign [this is secondhand].
i thought most of the people you'ld have met at a hillary
rally are menopausal women and economic losers? anyway,
after you both go your own ways, be sure to tell her the
only reason you "went through the hillary supporting
motions" was so she'd "go through the motions". be sure
to refer to hillary as "the sanctimonious hypocritical
liar" so she knows which hillary you are talking about.
\_ Uhm, I suspect most people reading the motd have already had
their shot at primary voting. Who are you trying to convince? |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Uncategorized] UID:49551 Activity:nil |
3/24 These free Tibet fuckers are pissing me off, just like those LA
riot assholes. They should be taken outside and shot like
animals. Free Tibet my ass.
\_ I know this is only Monday but even so I nominate you for,
"Weakest Troll Of The Week" award! I don't think anyone will
come up with anything lamer by Friday.
\_ Any chance that the Chinese govt was that one setting fire on their
own embassy in SF?
\_ Ok, how about Free the Whales people? Free Willy? |
| 2008/3/24-25 [Finance/Banking, Reference/Tax] UID:49552 Activity:high |
3/24 Opinion: companies that require tax-payer funded bailouts should pay
for this privilege in advance as a kind of insurance. -- ilyas
\_ So you advocate a business tax? I don't think we need a new
business tax. I don't think we need bailouts either. Let them
take their lumps and retire with what they've already stolen.
Ban them all from every working in finance again to prevent
recycling these criminal idiots and let the markets recover
without government tampering. No bailouts. No silly taxes.
\_ No need for laws/rules, the free market will take care of it.
Requiring anything extra will stifle competition and make
US less competitive to other countries. No.
\_ It's very simple, if you want free taxpayer money in case of a
'catastrophe,' you need to pay the taxpayers a premium. This
isn't just about the latest financial meltdown, but also
airlines, farming, etc. -- ilyas
\_ Seems kind of redundant, given the presence of private insurance.
So I guess what you're saying is that companies should not be bailed
out. Which isn't very interesting but I agree.
\_ I am prepared to admit that bailouts might be necessary in
some cases, I just want to make the fuckers pay for this.
-- ilyas
\_ Yes, this is essentially what the FDIC is all about. It is obvious
that these IBs need a similar level of regulation. What pisses me
off is that the BSC shareholders are going to get billions from
the taxpayers. I was okay with a $2 (fuck you) bailout, because
I understand the risk to the financial system, but why $10?
\_ I'm fine with the shadow banking system getting a bailout, so
long as they're willing to submit to regulation and oversight
(just like ordinary commercial banks). If you want to operate
with impunity, that's fine, but you shouldn't expect the
goverment to swoop in and save your stupid ass when you mess up.
\_ The purpose of the bailout wasn't to protect the company,
but to build confidence in our financial system and to
prevent from market melt-down. Ultimately, the goal is
to protect the American dollar, hence everyone wins.
\_ It is more prudent to protect the American dollar by
regulating dangerous behavior by financial institutions,
than it is to let them screw everything up and then
bail them out. -tom
\_ I don't think anyone will disagree with you except
the it doesn't change the fact that dangerous behavior
already happened. It's as helpful as trying to preach
safe sex to people who already got a bunch of STDs.
\- "first you have at admit you have a problem^W^W^W^W
there was a bail out".
\_ What if there was no BSC bailout? Exactly what dire
effects for all of us are we trying to prevent? Dollar
devaluation, is that what you're saying? I think that
would be temporary. The broader macroeconomic policies
of the fed. gov't seem more important. In a larger sense,
bailouts undermine the entire market. The only real
accountability executives have is to their shareholders.
The only way to force that accountability is to make the
prospect of shareholders losing their shirts very real.
\_ There are real concerns of a domino effect; a BSC
failure would put liquidity pressure on all the other
institutions which hold BSC debt, which could lead to
more failures. Complete meltdown of the financial
system is not outside the realm of possibility.
Still, bailing out BSC sucks. -tom
\_ Yeah I mean, I would think they should let BSC die
ignobly, and even let a couple other dominoes fall
perhaps. Bail out when it actually does seem
necessary; let some smaller fish take over. I'm
skeptical of a term like "complete meltdown of the
financial system". I'm sure the most irresponsible
entities would like to trumpet themselves as being
key to the entire "financial system" and therefore
must be saved from their own mistakes. Just like
any corporate welfare is couched in noble terms.
\_ Yes, and this is exactly the problem with the
shadow system. Without any regulatory oversight
or standards, who really knows what is lurking
behind BSC? Maybe they really are the key!
Or maybe not...
I hate to drag out that hoary old quote from
Buffet about derivatives being "financial
weapons of mass destruction," but in this
case it seems warranted.
\_ Dire? Think of all the yachts that won't be bought
that year! My God! Think of the yacht makers'
children!
\_ LANDLORD WITH A YACHT!
\_ Go read up on the panics the economy used to routinely
experience in the late 1800's, with unemployment in
the 20%+ range and bank runs and get back to me with
any questions.
\_ http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion/greenspan.html
\_ The Financial Times agrees with you, as do I. -ausman
http://www.csua.org/u/l4i
\_ Why don't you point us to something? And also say
what your point is. |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Science/GlobalWarming] UID:49553 Activity:nil 97%like:49549 |
3/24 Oops, biofuels are worse re greenhouse gasses
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/03/24/ap4806595.html
http://preview.tinyurl.com/yv7nyg [wsj] |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Computer/SW/Languages/Java] UID:49554 Activity:kinda low |
3/24 http://plone.org/about/movies Java is the COBOL of 21st century, as exaggerated by the author. Scroll to the bottom and click that video. \_ Wow, what a weak argument. It boils down to "properties are good!" No balance about drawbacks of Python, and a tremendously weak analysis of Ruby. \_ Java is the crapness. Admit it. \_ Oh, I happily admit it. -pp \_ C. High enough level to get work done, low enough level to do anything you need. \_ Any language without garbage collection is a lose. Development/ debug time is tons higher. (There are places where C is good, but most of them are native calls inside tight loops.) \_ Garbage collection is just a crutch for sloppy programming. \_ Wrong. Garbage collection lets you build code that doesn't have to worry about lifespan issues. That's a huge win. Yes, 99% of all memory allocation issues are easy, but that 1% will kill you. \_ I've used C, Java and Ruby and this is one of the most content-free arguments I've seen on the topic of language choice. |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/President/Clinton] UID:49555 Activity:low |
3/24 CBS has picked up the Hillary/Bosnia snafu
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4
\- ^snafu^lie
\_ Snafu? You meant to say "lie". There's a looong way from "We were
under threat of death from sniper fire! They send the First Lady
when it is too dangerous to send the President!" to "We hopped off
the plane into a beautiful sunny day where young local girls tossed
flowers at us".
\_ The interesting thing was how she invented an entire long story
extolling the evasive capabilities of the transport plane and
pantomimed "running to the cars". "And that's how it happened."
Just bizarre. And now she said "I misspoke" which is another
lie.
\- I am not sure what the Clinton equivalent of "faith-based
community" is, but it's not "reality based". Maybe "Hillary-
expedient-recovered-memory-based". I agree with you the
"vividness" of some of her recollections are disturbing ...
like she has some kind of heroic delusion. I think she
actually believes she is more clever than Bill Clinton,
which is clearly untrue. If she loses, I wonder if they
will effectively split up. |
| 2008/3/24-27 [Politics/Domestic/Election] UID:49556 Activity:very high |
3/24 McCain's endless free ride
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2008_03/013394.php
\_ McCain's free ride will end when Hillary finally gives up. He's
going to get slaughtered. -tom
\_ Maybe. I wish I shared your confidence in that.
\_ No kidding, Bush was going to get "slaughtered" too how the
the heck does a bumbling incompetent get [s]elected twice?
\_ c.f. "Idiocracy"
\_ I didn't think Bush was going to get slaughtered. The
situation is completely different today. McCain will
be viewed as the candidate of yesterday; he will win if
people think the country's current state is good.
What do you think? -tom
\_ Unless the Dems get their act together and nominate
ALGOR, McCain is going to be our next president. It
is fairly clear that Billary can't win. I used to
think Obama could win but Billary has really done a
number on him in the last few weeks. Because of this
I think McCain has a good chance of beating Obama.
I think McCain has a very good chance of beating
Obama.
I think McCain will most likely beat Obama.
\_ The idea of Al Gore as a candidate is laughable.
He had enormous advantages over Dubya and still
lost. He lost his own home state. He's got one
strong topic, the environment, which doesn't seem
like a major issue in this campaign. -tom
\_ ALGOR's biggest advantage is the realization
of the electorate of how different things would
have been if he had become President in 2000.
Also, unlike Obama, he hasn't been broken down
by Billary. At this point, he is probably the
only democrat who can take on McCain and win.
\_ Asserting that again doesn't make it any
less stupid. -tom
\_ Do you really think people who voted for Dubya in 2004
will vote for Obama now? I think it will be the usual
red vs. blue scenario.
\_ Yes, I do. Something happening twice doesn't make
it the "usual" scenario. Votes are a lot more
elastic than that. Ronald Reagan carried New York.
Clinton carried Georgia. -tom
\_ Consider: McCain is less polarizing, seen as more
moderate, than Bush. Obama is more polarizing
than Kerry or Gore, apparently: for the racial
issue if not the political issues.
I rate their chances as 50/50 either way. It will
depend on what media events happen between now
and November. But don't take my word for it:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/2yke8u
The trend is actually for McCain. Saying McCain
is going to get slaughtered is delusional. It's
typical for you guys to delude yourself about
the appeal of the Republican candidates. You
don't understand the R voters.
The only way McCain will get slaughtered is if
he goes senile and cracks up on national TV:
his age is his weakness.
\_ I understand R voters just fine, you don't
understand swing voters at all. They care
mostly about the economy, which is going to
hell. Who do you think they are going to blame
for this? How much do you want to bet on the
outcome? -ausman
\_ I don't want to bet. I already said I
rate the chances 50/50. If I want to bet
near 50/50 I'll go play craps somewhere.
I pointed to polls showing 50/50. Are you
a Swami who foretells some vast shift
in public opinions within the next 6
months? It's not very credible to
place blame for all problems at the feet
of the incumbent party. The D's voted
us into Iraq also. The D's have controlled
Congress lately.
\_ Intrade and the Iowa markets have it
\_ Intrade and the other markets have it
more like 60/40. But I am sure all the
people betting there are not as wise
and experienced in these things as you
are. I expect the polls to change
pretty hard against McCain after the
Democratic nomination. And a majority
of Democrats in Congress voted against
the Iraq War. Retelling that tired
old lie of yours doesn't make it any
more convincing.
\_ The Senate is not Congress? A lot of
D's voted for it, and a majority in
the Senate. D's control Congress.
D's continue to fund the war. I think
I was mentioning delusions a couple
posts ago.
McCain hasn't really begun to fight.
You really think it's so obvious?
You should go bet on Intrade, those
40-something ask prices are ripe for
the picking.
\_ You are the one claiming that it
is 50/50, you should be grabbing
all the 40's you can.
\_ The topic here started with
someone questioning tom's
claim that McCain will get
"slaughtered". If you want
to define what that means
(Obama gets >60% of pop vote?)
then maybe I could bet against
that.
I'm not claiming Obama will
lose. I don't like the odds
enough to risk losing. You
are the one who is apparently
certain of the outcome. My
entire point is that it's
uncertain. (Someone else
claimed McCain would win.)
\_ I am not certain, but I
think the race is the
Democrats to lose. They
might just do that though. |
| 5/17 |