| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2009/2/27-3/5 [Politics/Domestic/California, Health/Women] UID:52654 Activity:moderate |
2/27 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7914357.stm *shocking* allegations. China denounces US 'rights abuse': China has responded in detail to a US report published this week criticising China for alleged rights abuses. Beijing released its own report on the US, saying crime is a threat to many Americans and racial discrimination prevails in social life across the US. \_ Chinese obviously doesn't know much about America. American are actually very abusive in terms of human rights but we've just accept it as part of the norm. example, USA has the highest incarceration rate, relatively high murder rate, Blacks/Latinos being jailed for drug-related crime are disproportionally higher than the demographics of the drug users, etc, etc. And I haven't start talking about outsourcing tortures, prisoner abuse, detain people indefinitely without trial nor charges... I really don't know what is so special about China and their human rights. \_ We generally don't run over protestors with tanks here. -tom \_ All of China is not Bejing. \_ Virtually no one in the USA goes to jail for just using drugs. In fact, in California, even many small time dealers may be released off the hook if caught dealing the first time. Those minorities in jail you're talking about are not there for just drug use. Most of them are recedivist dealers who negotiated a plea deal where they accept a relatively small jail time for drug possession in exchange for the judges dropping the more serious charges. They do it because most of them know their case wouldn't stand in court, and they would have to go to jail for much longer time. Just go outside of campus and see who is dealing drugs. \_ This is not true. I will do some research and get back to you, but there are millions in jail in the US for possession only. \_ Yeah. Please do so. Find and post whacked liberal web site link of the week to support your liberal agenda. I know second hand from people who had known others who had gone through the system. \_ Well since you put it that way, I won't waste my time. Obviously your second hand anecdotal knowledge is superior than any kind of fact-based reasoning. \_ Please tell us about your facts. What are they? You have a proof that the vast majority of drug "users" were not jailed for dealing? No one goes to jail for using drugs in California. That's a fact "users" were not jailed for dealing? No one goes to jail for using drugs in California. That's a fact Even small time dealers get at worst a probation sentense. Anyone who has gone through this system will tell you this. People who are in jail for the most part are real criminals. No doubt about it. You will tell you this. People who are in jail for the most part are the hardened criminals. No doubt about it. You can't see who is dealing drugs in the Bay Area and elsewhere? You still need to do research on that? elsewhere? You need to do research on that? Puhhlease.. \_ "No one goes to jail in California for using drugs." Having a hard time tracking down CA-specific numbers, but Bureau of Justice reports 250k prisoners under jurisdiction of state correctional authorities for drug offenses in 2005: http://csua.org/u/nnz If you can find a breakdown of CA prison pop. that shows no drug offenders, your case is made. \_ I don't know if he's right or not, but surely you realize that your link doesn't actually answer his claim. (Maybe for the same reason as conspiracy theories are impossible to disprove, but still...) Especially since dealing is a drug offense... -!pp \_ Catch-22, then. I would like much clearer statistics, but the sources are hard to find. \_ Yeah, you'd need to find both: how many people are in jail _just_ for possession, and how many plea deals were struck to reduce dealing to possession. And, you'd have to take into account the DAs who use a dealing charge as a threat to get a plea on possession.... \_ http://mises.org/freemarket_detail.aspx?control=7 \_ You might be right, even the DEA is in favor of treatment over jail for first time posession: http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/demand/speakout/10so.htm There's your wacked out liberal site for you, DOJ. |
| 2009/2/27-3/6 [Politics/Domestic/California, Reference/Tax] UID:52655 Activity:low |
2/27 CA unemployment increases from 9.3% to 10.1% for Jan
\_ Good thing the legislature passed the biggest tax increase in
history! That should solve it.
\_ because cutting taxes has done such a great job so far!
\_ it has.. giving mortgages to poor folks did us in
\_ 100% horseshit.
\_ Find me an economist who thinks raising taxes will help
grow the economy.
\_ States can't run a deficit AND because of our fucked
up initiative system CA spending is pretty locked.
There's not much choice.
\_ I guess States need some of the stimulus money then
because the Feds can run a deficit. Raising taxes
right now is stupid.
\_ Raising taxes might hurt the economy less than cutting
services would.
\_ Those are not the only two choices.
\_ Once again, 100% horseshit.
http://blogs.bellinghamherald.com/politics/?p=845
"Drawing upon economic theory, we believe
reducing government spending will have a more
deleterious effect on Washington s economy than
would increasing revenue. Although both cuts in
government spending and tax increases have the
potential to slow economic growth, cutting
government spending would likely have the most
immediate impact by directly reducing
consumption. Tax increases are less problematic
because individual consumers, especially those
with higher-incomes, are unlikely to reduce
consumption by the full amount of the tax
increase." (First hit on Google.) -tom
\_ You do realize that all but a small handful
of the economists who are urging for higher
taxes rather than reduced government spending
in that letter are government employees,
right? 100% horseshit indeed.
\_ You asked me to find you an economist who
thinks raising taxes will grow the economy,
and I found you 20+ on the first Google hit,
\_ Uh, no. Those 20+ economist merely *said*
raising taxes would grow the economy. Whether
or not they actually *think* it will is
completely different. As I pointed out, they
were arguing for raising taxes in favor of
cutting state spending. Just casually looking
at where these people worked, all but 3-4 of
them were easily identifiable as state employees.
Do you want me to spell it out for you?
\_ Well, gee, pretty much all the economists
who say that raising taxes is bad are
wealthy taxpayers, so I guess we can ignore
their opinions. -tom
\_ Before you were just dense. Now you're
making imaginary arguments.
\_ How is it any more imaginary than the
argument that we should discount
economists who work for the
government? Economists who don't
work for the government directly
benefit from lower taxes; by your
"logic," we should discount their
opinions due to conflict of
interest. -tom
including several who are not government
employees. So, yes, 100% horseshit. Want to
try moving the yardsticks again? OK, here are
some more:
\_ These economists are comparing raising
taxes versus cutting spending, which is not
really the issue. Cutting spending right now
would be suicide. The alternative to raising
taxes is not cutting spending. It's running
a deficit, which makes sense to do during
lean economic times. During a Depression is
not the time to balance the budget.
\_ Nice job moving the yardsticks again. -tom
\_ You have a really low hurdle for
success if you want to take the
original statement literally.
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/socialstudies.php
\_ This article says nothing at all about taxes versus economic
growth, but it does point out that federal spending as a % of
GDP is higher than historical levels.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/business/economy/25leonhardt.html
Please discount those, too. -tom
\_ The guy in this article notes that the economy grew the fastest
in the late 1990s when Clinton "briefly took federal taxes to
20% of GDP". There is no correlation between the taxes being
high and the <DEAD>dot.com<DEAD> growth. I think raising taxes during boom
periods is a smart idea, but the taxes were not the cause of the
boom. At the article points out, when you raise taxes on
cigarettes, consumption decreases. When you raise taxes on oil,
consumption decreases. You think raising income taxes will not
decrease consumption? Herbert Hoover raised taxes during the
Depression and it was a horrible blunder. Read up about it.
Let's not do that again.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/wm1835.cfm
\_ Do you understand the difference between income tax and
sales tax?
\_ Do you understand the similarities? |
| 2009/2/27-3/6 [Reference/RealEstate] UID:52656 Activity:nil |
2/27 Woah, check out inflation-adjusted home prices over the years
http://static.seekingalpha.com/uploads/2009/1/30/saupload_case_shiller_chart_updated.png
\_ Yeah, during the top of the bubble people kept saying prices
needed to drop 50%, looks about right. |
| 2009/2/27-3/5 [Uncategorized] UID:52657 Activity:nil |
2/27 Say you're upgrading your wedding band, what's a good place to
trade in your old one?
\_ http://www.tradeshop.com
\_ You might start with the jeweler where you're getting the new
one. They might even make the new one out of the metal from the
old one, which would save you money and provide some continuity
from the old ring to the new one, if you care about that kind of
thing (which it sounds like you don't).
\_ Yeah, I mean, metal is metal... is it suppose like, contain
some type of soul or meta-aura inside it or something?
\_ sounds silly but you will get serious brownie points for
saying "this is made from the same metal you bought for me
sweetie" etc
\_ Not just brownie points: sometimes it's non-negotiable.
When I broke my ring finger and had to have the ring
cut off, my wife _insisted_ that I get the band repaired
instead of replaced. YMMV. --erikred
\_ If it's just metal why bother with the wedding band in
the first place?
\_ I don't think most jewelers like to work with old
metal--different alloys have different metal ratios and purity
levels, and mixing two batches doesn't always turn out well. But
your best bet is to ask a jeweler who does custom work.
\_ Cash4Gold |
| 2009/2/27-3/5 [Computer/Networking] UID:52658 Activity:nil |
2/27 I need to buy a wireless router, can u guys help me out? I need the
following features: wireless, G or better, PPTP dial up, PPoE dialup,
VoIP/SIP register, DDNS, uPnP.
I am having a such hard time to find a review site which allow me to
select these features. Any ideas? There are a couple model from
this small company Draytek has these features, I am having the hardest
time picking out Linksys/Netgear model that has similiar features.
I want to by-pass China's great Firewall as well as using SIP VoIP
servies. thanks in advance.
\_ uPnP is the first thing I disable on a router. Why do you want it?
\_ Would you consider having some of those features off the router?
For the SIP bit, I'd consider Asterix on ALIX (http://pcengines.ch
and otherwise, WRT-54G with dd-wrt is pretty good. Don't know if
it has everything you want. -John |
| 2009/2/27-3/5 [Uncategorized] UID:52659 Activity:nil |
2/27 Q408 GDP revised from -3.8% to ... @!!% some ungodly number! S&P
beter be returning me at least 10% this year!
\_ This is all Obama's fault. |
| 2009/2/27-3/11 [Academia/Berkeley/CSUA/Motd] UID:52660 Activity:kinda low |
2/27 Stupid question -- I know I've been away for a while, but has
anyone ever discussed something like a CSUA phpbb or similar
setup? I get the impression hardly anyone uses wall anymore,
and I'm surprised the motd is still active. -John
\_ Yes. I played around with it for a while, but people raised
such bitching about the evils of phpbb that I opted to not
implement my own forum software. I agree it would be nice
for people to get persistent discussions going. -mrauser
\_ I have no idea about phpBB, but I would like something to
replace the motd that new students can get into. -jrleek
\_ I had an idea at lunch with Ausman today -- motd
anonymity is good, so create a dummy user. Let people
log in with either their regular account (PAM auth
or something) or via the dummy user -- which then
requires an authentication process with CSUA
credentials to a user's account (to avoid anonymous
non-CSUA hosers.) Don't log these accesses (or
maybe just "bob authenticated to the dummy acct. on
xyz date") and let authenticated users then post
anonymously. Problem solved. BTW, phpbb was just
an example -- anything web-based would do. If this
is of interest to anyone, I can look into it. -John
\_ I don't understand. The whole point of the internet
discussion is to have transparency and open discussions.
Why do you want to limit yourself to a few selected
CSUAers? A closed systems usually turns into flame-fest
with a bunch of same old cranky farts like holub.
\_ I don't think anonymous access is desirable or
aligned with CSUA goals. It's basically a historical
accident, and it's not currently providing any
value to the CSUA. It's not necessary. -tom
[Some anonymous twink deleted this message--why is it
important for the CSUA to support that kind of
behavior?]
[Some anonymous twink deleted this message, twice
now--why is it important for the CSUA to support that
kind of behavior?]
\_ I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that this is
not a troll. The CSUA used to be a good platform (I
have been out of the loop for a while) for connecting
students with alumni, among others. MOTD is a
functional but archaic method for posting stuff, and
I don't think many people have the time or patience
to deal with it. If you're interested in getting
students in contact with graduates regarding know-how,
jobs, whatever, you'll go for whatever works. Second,
there are people such as you (since you didn't sign
your post) who want anonymity. That's fine, and I
respect that. Forced transparency stifles discussion.
I like the CSUA, it got me started with computers in
my career, and it'd be nice to give back; regarding
limiting discussion to CSUA members, I also maintain
stronger ties with alumni from my b-school because I
am pretty sure that they're of reasonably high quality.
Anyway, this all is moot if nobody's interested. I am
happy to invest the time and effort if someone wants
to let me know. -John
\_ There seems to be quite a bit of interest in this,
I'm interested, mrauser seems interested, tom is.
Even the current politburo seems interested. There
was some talk about this last semester. They
redesigned the website, but I guess they didn't get
around to the forum. (Much harder, after all)
If you want to take it on, it seems like there
would be plenty of people to cheer you on. :)
-jrleek
\_ s/they/I/i. I redesigned the site because while I
could easily maintain the site, it required some
level of comfort with UNIX and the command-line
which quite simply most students nowadays lack. In
other words, I decided supporting Movable Type was
easier than supporting the older (and more flexible
IMO) system, since the current secretary isn't as
experienced with HTML, Markdown, Python, etc.
easier than supporting the older (and more
flexible IMO) system, since the current secretary
isn't as experienced with HTML, Markdown, Python,
etc.
Re: the forum - I wanted a forum, but politburo
last semester, while not actually opposed, lacked
any interest in me setting one up. Some people on
motd complained about it and nobody stepped up to
offer to do it, so it died a quiet death. John is
100% correct on lack of time and patience to wade
through motd; my usage drops off significantly
when I have work to do, especially with all the
polticial-economic discussions I have no interest
in reading (that's not to say I'm not generally
interested in the topic, but let's not get into
that or start a flame war). I still would like a
forum. If someone here is willing to set one up,
I'd like that. --toulouse
\_ Someone at work set up a Simple Machines Forum
in like 1 day. I can't say how secure it
is, but it works. There are others.
\_ Do whatever you want to set up new and
alternative forums, but leave the motd
and wall alone for those who wish to
continue to use them in spite of their
limitations. The arent doing harm or
sucking major resources, and they have
value to some, so no reason this should
be XOR instead of AND.
\_ Paranoid much? Why would we destroy
motd or wall? They have basically no
overhead. The point is to set up
something that serves the CSUA's
needs better, not to take MOTD away
from alumni. --t
\_ who is paranoid? a reasonable
comment since turning these off
has been proposed before and
csua leadership has often gotten
"no brainer" issues wrong. asked and
answered.
\_ Except for the fact that I've
made it abundantly clear before
that I won't be shutting down
motd. The fact that I'm using
motd should tell you something,
too. Looks like you got a "no
brainer" issue wrong. :P --t |