Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Clarence Thomas's Copy of the Constitution (Score 2, Interesting) 528

by djseomun (#28481369) Attached to: Middle-School Strip Search Ruled Unconstitutional

No, you think it's an issue of the government conducting an unreasonable search without a warrant. If you read Justice Thomas's dissent, he explains why he believes the search was reasonable.

...the Court in T. L. O. held that a school search is "reasonable" if it is " 'justified at its inception' " and " 'reasonably related in scope to the circumstances which justified the interference in the first place.' " Id., at 341-342 (quoting Terry v. Ohio, 392 U. S. 1, 20 (1968) ). The search under review easily meets this standard.

With regard to "strict construction[ism]," first, it is a meaningless phrase. No one on the Supreme Court self-identifies as a "strict constructionist." Justice Scalia, the one most associated with the term, dismisses it as a "degraded form of textualism..." and wishes that no one be a strict constructionist.

Now, the more important point: there is no misunderstanding here. The Constitution is not a living document; it is a dead one. So, that the Constitution "did not [originally] apply to schools" is not a problem whatsoever. An amendment changed that, and that's the way change ought to be effected. The judiciary is not in the business of creating anything; they are merely interpreters. The legislature is in the business of creating laws.

Comment: Re:Clarence Thomas's Copy of the Constitution (Score 2, Interesting) 528

by djseomun (#28474019) Attached to: Middle-School Strip Search Ruled Unconstitutional

Justice Thomas does not believe that the Fourth Amendment is "null and void." Rather, he does not believe that there is a Constitutional right to privacy. It's fact that the word 'privacy' doesn't once appear in the U.S. Constitution. Justice Douglas created it in Griswold v. Connecticut, and a majority of his colleagues voted in favor of it.

As Justice Thomas doesn't believe in stare decisis, period, it's not surprising that he is still fighting against the "right to privacy."

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28176763) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

Correcting misinformation is not racism. Please do not confuse the two. I have never claimed that Chinese are superior to Indians, Koreans, and so forth. Find me a single instance where I made any such remark.

I'm really not sure why you believe that being brought up in American culture makes it impossible for to embrace one's heritage. I was brought up in American culture, and yet I am fluent in Mandarin, know where my grandparents were born, and celebrate Chinese New Year. I can't imagine what kind of my reaction my neighbor would have if you told him he wasn't Indian, to be honest.

I'm not claiming that there is no American heritage. I am simply disputing your strange claim that Americans can't embrace their parents' heritage, especially if they are "young" Americans (e.g. second-generation). It is up to the parents to teach their children their language and culture. Just because some don't doesn't mean that there is no chance for an American to embrace his parents' heritage.

For the third time and the record, I was not rubbing in any "my dad beat the shit outta your dad" to my neighbor. We were talking about Tibet, and the Sino-Indian War came up as a result of our discussion on Tibet. I hope I've finally made myself clear that we were talking about Tibet.

As I said, I'll give you that the Chinese fired the first shots. To you, that makes the Chinese the aggressors. As you accept, China was not unprovoked. Nehru broke the status quo by ordering the Indian Army to move forward into disputed territory. To me, that makes India the aggressor. Moreover, after the war, China retreated to pre-war borders (ie. the status quo). I wager that had Nehru not ordered the Indians to move forward, the Chinese wouldn't have attacked. Don't think so? Then why is NEFA still under Indian control? The PLA marched all the way to New Delhi; it could certainly have taken NEFA if it wanted to, but it didn't.

I don't know who "you" refers to. I'm American by birth. My allegiance is to the United States, not China. I'm writing to correct misinformation about China.

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28173485) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

Did you honestly just claim that Vietnam is not that much better off than North Korea? You do realize that Vietnam also undertook significant market reforms in the past two decades, yes?

Vietnam's GDP in 2008 U.S. dollars as measured by PPP was $241.8 billion in 2008. By contrast, North Korea's GDP was $40 billion, and that's definitely an overestimate.

South Korea's GDP is certainly much bigger, but I hope you're not seriously trying to say that $241.8 billion is "not that much better than" $40 billion.

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28171423) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

No, that is not dumb. You have confused nationality with heritage. By the fourteenth amendment, any person born in the United States is an American. That doesn't mean that an American with two Indian parents isn't Indian. Just because he's not an Indian national or citizen doesn't mean he's not Indian.

Thanks for not answering my question. Clueless or not, he still knew that India and China fought a war four decades ago. How'd he find out? How'd he 'know' that India "won"? I don't know, but you can't just write off the fact that he knew the 1962 Sino-Indian War happened. Somehow, he found out, and I'm pretty sure that he didnt learn about it in school. U.S. history classes are far more likely to cover the Cuban Missile Crisis than the Sino-Indian War.

Uncontested that China was the aggressor? Is that so? The Republic of India was founded in 1947, and the People's Republic of China was founded in 1949. The war started in 1962, so clearly there was a time period when neither nation was enforcing its respective border claim. Unless both sides initiated hostilities at the same time, someone had to have made the first move. So, who moved first? India did. Nehru ordered the Indian Army to move forward and claim "Indian land." Nehru broke the status quo. I'll admit that the Chinese probably fired the first shot, but it was the Indians who broke the peace by moving first.

And, as I wrote, we were talking about Tibet, not Sino-Indian relations. Considering the location of Tibet within China and India, it's not hard to see how we ended up talking about that.

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28169111) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

First, my second group referred to about older Chinese who somehow grew up completely unaware that China borders North Korea and the DPRK.

Second, what's your point? Are you suggesting that radio stations, television stations, and newspapers do not cover international news? That's not true, and like I said, if you grew up under Mao, you knew that he bitched about the USSR. I'm not surprised that young people don't know that, but older 'educated people' definitely know that.

The fact is that you obviously don't know enough overseas Chinese who have long since graduated with their undergraduate degrees. Talk to them and then tell me that they're still as ignorant as the younger Chinese you know.

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28168789) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

That's funny. You don't once mention 'college students' in your original post. Since when is 'educated people' synonymous with 'college students?' There are lots of educated overseas Chinese who haven't been college students in decades. I guess you weren't talking about them because you know that your post would've made no sense if you were.

I responded to your claim about how "every Chinese person...was unaware that North Korea invaded South Korea." That statement is simply unbelievable. Chinese know that they participated in the Korean War, and they know why the Korean War happened. And, when the U.S. makes up nearly 80% of the non-RoK forces, it's kind of hard to think that you're somehow "not" fighting the U.S. You know? I'll give you that most Chinese probably don't know the exact fatality count in the Korean War. But, to say that the war is pointless highlights your Western bias. Do you really think that the CCP would tolerate a U.S. military base located in North Korea? And, again, my father is well aware that MacArthur threatened to nuke China. I really doubt he's an exception among his generation.

No, the PLA entering Tibet was not an invasion. That you say it is indicates your lack of knowledge about modern Chinese history. Tibet claimed to be independent after the fall of the Qing in 1911, but neither the RoC nor the PRC ever accepted that. No modern Chinese government has ever signed a treaty recognizing Tibetan independence. By contrast, the PRC did agree to forever cede all claims to Mongolia. The Tibetans had a chance to force the Chinese to recognize their independence in 1914, but they didn't take it. The Union sure as hell didn't think it was invading the Confederate States in the U.S. Civil War, but under your logic, they did invade.

Do you know for a fact that history classes in China do not cover the 1962 Sino-Indian War? No, you don't. And, hell, neither do I. All I know is that it is extremely unlikely that people of my father's generation, who left China in their twenties and thirties and are now in their forties and fifties, are unaware that India and China fought a war in 1962 and that the Chinese and the Soviets split over ideology during the same decade. If you grew up under Mao, you knew that he bitched at the Soviets. It's just that simple.

Under your logic, the U.S. lost the Korean War. That's a minority position at best. The consensus is that the U.S. tied in the Korean War; it neither won nor lost. And, that is the consensus on the Sino-Vietnamese War. Of course, you are well within your right to adopt a minority view. What's more, I'll give you that the Sino-Vietnamese War isn't all that well known among younger Chinese. I only ask that you recognize that older Chinese are well aware that China fought a war with Vietnam in the 1980s.

You simply haven't met enough Chinese. 'Educated people' consists of more than just current 'college students.' Talk to some 'college graduates,' both recent and old, and then come back to me and say that almost all Chinese you've met know nothing about their country's history.

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28167267) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

You say you've never met any Indian who believes so. I'm guessing from context that you're talking about Indians born in India, not Indians born in America.

If so, then I can't say that I've met any Indians who believe India won, either. I base my claim off partially on my next-door neighbor from freshman year. We were talking about Tibet, and the issue of the border war between India and China came up. He then said, "India beat China in that war."

Now, while his parents are from Tamil Nadu, he's American by birth and upbringing. U.S. history classes by and large don't cover the 1962 Sino-Indian War. So, how did he 'know' that "India beat China"? His parents seem to be the most likely source, but I don't know for sure.

The other part of my claim is the Wikipedia article for the 1962 war. If you check some copies of the article from last year or two years ago, I think you'll notice something strange. The box on the top right clearly shows that Chinese casualties were far less than Indian casualties. Yet, if you read the article, it would seem like the Chinese had a pyrrhic victory. I lost count of how many times I read about heroic Indian soldiers who were hopelessly outnumbered but managed to stave off hordes of Chinese invaders for days on end before finally becoming martyrs. To be fair, there's no proof that those were written by "hardcore Indian nationalists." They could've been written by trolls who are neither Indian nor Chinese. Which is more likely to you?

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28167103) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent

That may be a bigger issue, but it's not the one I addressed in my response. Stargoat's post contained several highly questionable statements and factual errors. I replied to address those.

The events he listed are not minor ones. Thus, I find his statement that almost every Chinese he has met is ridiculously ignorant about twentieth-century Chinese history to be truly unbelievable, unless he only knows young Chinese or Chinese who somehow never once listened to the news when they were growing up. Considering that he says he met his wife ten years ago, the first option doesn't seem to be all that likely. And, I think you'll agree that it is even less likely that a Chinese grew up completely isolated from world affairs, given the amount of control the CCP has over China.

Comment: Re:It's still inconvenient? (Score 1) 235

by djseomun (#28163477) Attached to: 20 Years After Tiananmen, China Stifles Online Dissent
  • How old are the Chinese people you met? My father is in his early 50s, and he left China in the mid 1980s. He is well aware that China fought the UN in the Korean War, reclaimed Tibet in 1959, beat India in 1962, feuded with the USSR, and tied Vietnam in the 1980s. I highly doubt that he's the only one who knows all those things.
  • The US-led counterattack at Incheon pushed the North Koreans all the way back to the Yalu River. The People's Volunteer Army then entered the war and pushed the UN back to the 38th parallel, no easy task considering that the UN forces were far better equipped than the PVA. I find it very unlikely that Chinese would not be taught this, especially since one battle in the Korean War marked the first time in a century that a Chinese army defeated a Western army.
  • If you ask Chinese whether the PLA invaded Tibet, I'm sure you'll get a lot of confused looks. The fact of the matter is, no modern Chinese government has ever accepted the claim that Tibet was independent before 1959. You see it as an invasion; they saw it as reclaiming rogue territory.
  • Regardless of what some hardcore Indian nationalists say, India lost the 1962 Sino-Indian War. This is not a secret in China.
  • Anyone raised in China during the time the PRC began its feud with the USSR knows of the Sino-Soviet Split. Mao was pretty forthright in his dislike of the USSR when he started bitching with Khrushchev.
  • China did not lose its border war with Vietnam. The result was inconclusive. Both sides suffered heavy casualties for such a brief war, and neither side gained or lost any territory. If you were old enough to remember events as a person living in 1980s China, then you'll remember this war.
  • I can only say that the Chinese you know are either really young or never bothered to pay attention to their country's affairs when they were growing up.

Comment: Re:Huh? (Score 1) 470

by djseomun (#27632729) Attached to: A Secure OS For the Dalai Lama?

My intro CS class at Georgia Tech used a homegrown development environment that had Windows, OS X, and Linux ports. The Windows version was simply a generic installer. Double-click the *.exe, follow the directions, and then click the shortcut on the desktop. Finished.

The OS X version, on the other hand, actually required the user to go into the terminal and ./ the executable. My friend from high school has a MacBook Pro. When the professor told the Mac-using students to open the Terminal, I distinctly remember hearing my friend say, "Whoa! Is this DOS?"

Point of my story? Trust me, sudo aptitude safe-upgrade may be easy for you, but think of the others...

Comment: Re:OpenBSD should be the obvious choice (Score 2, Interesting) 470

by djseomun (#27632691) Attached to: A Secure OS For the Dalai Lama?

OpenBSD is one of the labels of this article, but I, too, am surprised as to how infrequently it has been mentioned. The first thing that came to my mind when I read the title was "OpenBSD."

At the time of posting, CTRL+F shows the following:

  • Windows (68 matches)
  • Mac (34 matches, maybe some false positives)
  • Linux (117 matches)

By contrast, OpenBSD has just 12 matches.

When you've read OpenBSD's /etc/rc.conf, you'll know what secure means. I love Archlinux, but Linux does not compare to OpenBSD in terms of security.

A large number of installed systems work by fiat. That is, they work by being declared to work. -- Anatol Holt

Working...