Byung Kyu Park's Personal Website

Well, I guess all good things have to come to an end. This email was in my inbox:

Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2011 13:31:00 -0800
To: anno...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU
Subject: OCF lab and printing ending after Spring 2012
Organization: Open Computing Facility at UC Berkeley
From: OCF announcements <anno...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU>

Hello OCF members,

Last night OCF's volunteer staff unanimously decided to close lab
services, including free printing, after Spring 2012.

OCF, as with other student groups in Eshleman Hall, will be moved out of
the building in August before it is demolished as part of Bears
Initiative. Until new space is obtained elsewhere on campus, we have
been allocated temporary space in Hearst Gymnasium basement for the
duration of Lower Sproul construction, which is projected to last for
at least 3 years.

This area is limited both in space and technical resources, and we feel
that it would be a disservice to all OCF members to provide an
unreliable and inadequate level of service, in both quality and
quantity. We would not be able to fit much of our computing and
printing equipment into the space allotted to us, and time constraints
limit what can be set up before the fall semester begins.

We understand and share your concern for the OCF. We too are students
and members of the OCF. This is a drastic change for the organization,
which has had a lab since 1989.

We want to restore the lab and its services as soon as possible, but we
must also keep in mind the process of our last two moves (to Heller
Lounge in the MLK Student Union, and to our present location in
Eshleman). It would be dishonest if we were not to give notice of lab
downtime, which has been unavoidable and excessive during each move.
Furthermore, the compressed space and needs of other student groups
constrain us more than in the past.

We hope that by shifting resources, we will be able to compensate by
expanding our other services, including currently web hosting, disk
space, email, and shell accounts, and ensure that they would not be
disrupted by a move as they have been before. We are looking at our
options for negotiating server space and we will continue hosting
websites, including those of student groups. We will better assist
other students and student groups as a technical resource given our
close proximity in the temporary space, and encourage you to make use
of what we would be able to offer.

We will be considering all options, including other space if available,
and appreciate any feedback or advice you can offer. We don't want to
let you down...

Good luck on finals guys,
OCF staff members,
Eshleman basement

P.S. One of the printers is broken, so printing might be slower than
we'd hope, but please, enjoy our lab while it lasts. 9am-9pm hours
during dead week and finals, see our website for more info.

[*] http://wayback.archive.org/web/*/http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu

You have received this announcement to update you about important
changes to the OCF. The Open Computing Facility is an all-volunteer
student organization providing free shell accounts, disk space, web
hosting, email, and printing from a lab, lounge, and server room in
Eshelman Hall.

This won’t affect me (like so many other things I post here), because I haven’t been to the OCF lab in years (and I frankly don’t really use their web/mail services any more either, I think I have a better (although not free, just “nearly free”) home now). But, well, as the email says, this is a break with a long tradition.

This was taken last week, in front of Le Conte. See anything wrong in the picture?

Recent email from the Chancellor (emphasis my own):

Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 10:27:53 -0800
From: “Robert J. Birgeneau, Chancellor”
To: “Staff, All Academic Titles, Other Members of the Campus Community, Deans, Directors, Department Chairs, Students, ”
Subject: Chancellor Birgeneau comments on Arizona shootings

Dear members of our campus community:

This weekend’s shooting of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords and the
deaths and injuries of many others in the horrific event in Tucson,
Arizona have shocked our nation. We here at UC Berkeley offer our
sincere condolences to everyone who has been personally affected by this
tragedy.

Such a brutal and violent attack on an individual who has devoted
herself to public service is deeply regrettable. It calls upon us as an
academic community to stop and ponder the climate in which such an act
can be contemplated, even by a mind that is profoundly disturbed. A
climate in which demonization of others goes unchallenged and hateful
speech is tolerated can lead to such a tragedy. I believe that it is
not a coincidence that this calamity has occurred in a state which has
legislated discrimination against undocumented persons. This same
mean-spirited xenophobia played a major role in the defeat of the Dream
Act by our legislators in Washington, leaving many exceptionally
talented and deserving young people, including our own undocumented
students, painfully in limbo with regard to their futures in this
country.

On our own campus, and throughout all the campuses of the University of
California, we must continue to work toward a climate of equity and
inclusion for all. We must be vigilant to condemn hate speech and acts
of vandalism on our campuses by those wanting to promote enmity. We
must work to support dialogue about our differences and eschew
expressions of demonization of others, including virulent attacks on
Israel, anti-Muslim graffiti, racism towards African-Americans,
Chicano/Latinos and other underrepresented minority groups, and
homophobic acts. Continuing to support our principles of community will
ensure a better and safer campus. We must do this now so that our
students, as future leaders of this great country, will continue to set
the standard for a better and safer nation.

Robert J. Birgeneau
Chancellor, UC Berkeley

He denounces demonization, only to quickly engaged in one of his own. Why, oh, why can’t academics refrain from politicizing actions of madmen?

BTW, evidences that emerged so far indicate that recent politics have nothing to do with the murder. The man was angry and disturbed enough all on his own, before the Arizona’s immigration law, before the tea parties and before Sarah Palin.

I sat down at a station in BSC lab today (sigh; not all students finished the demonstration before the professor left at 1:30 p.m., and instead of sensibly giving F to everyone who hasn’t presented when the professor had to leave, he offered to come back in an hour; I’m keeping the lab open but, well, by just sitting in the corner, not doing the usual GSI stuff), and I noticed this on the oscilloscope.

In particular, I am looking at,

Oh, look. That’s where I did my undergraduate!

…

Well, no. I’m just kidding. That’s where I did my undergraduate physics—although strictly speaking, it would be just the lower division physics; but then, foundation is everything, right?

What are the chances that a random oscilloscope in the lab … comes from a community college that I went to?

(If you actually want to do the math, order-of-magnitude estimate probably can be done by taking the reciprocal of number of electronics labs (with small enough budget that we still have to use cathode-rays-and-fluorescent-screens analog oscilloscopes, not the fancier digital scopes) and multiplying by the number of oscilloscopes in the BSC lab). Still, a rather small number.)

UAW 2865 has put up a website, giving fake grades to the University administration, and claiming that “over 6,000 members of UAW 2865″ including “12,000 Teaching Assistants, Tutors and Readers” signed a document criticizing the administration.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Following is the list of first 10 names of signatories from the website (the rest are in the page source; I’ve commented it out so that you don’t have to scroll down 6000 lines)

Allison Wyper
Nanor Mankerian
Jonathan Cass
Rebecca Fraynt
Kathy Swift
Jordan Hanson
Rebecca Bonebrake
Janel Fink
Ashley Koda
Chien-Ting Chen

I challenge you to look up those names in the Calnet Directory. You won’t see them there. While all this proves is that in a sample of 10 names, none of them were UC Berkeley (graduate) students, a random checks of several more names reveal the same result.

I won’t lie like the despicable “leaders” of UAW 2865. I do see a couple names that I do recognize (one current GSI and another who has been a GSI before), so I do recognize that there are real signatories there. But if UAW 2865 is going to quote “6000″ as if those “6000″ were drawn from pool of “12000″ GSIs, etc., then they should have done due diligence to ensure those 6000 signers were actually current, teaching members of UAW 2865.

This kind of trickery is both an insult to the administration’s and GSIs intelligence. The fact is, UAW 2865 is intentionally botching up this contract negotiation in order to have an excuse to declare a strike.

GSIs of UC Berkeley—Unite! Stand up against these corrupt union leaders.

Recent email from my beloved UAW 2865:

From: UAW 2865 Berkeley <berk...@uaw2865.org>
To: xxxx...@xxxxx.com
Subject: Healthcare Bargaining Update; Straw Poll on Demands
Date: Tue, 25 May 2010 16:23:22 +0000 (UTC)

Dear UAW Local 2865 member,

We are writing to update you on the current state of bargaining with the UC over
our healthcare benefits. On May 17, the University abruptly broke off
negotiations over implementation of a systemwide GSHIP that is to take effect
before the end of our current contract. The systemwide GSHIP contains many
positive features and we are pleased that the UC has accepted many of our
recommendations.  However, we feel strongly that further improvements can and
must be made, especially with regards to dependent healthcare benefits. To this
end, we will continue to bargain with the University for dependent-care-coverage
remissions in our full contract negotiations.  In continuing negotiations, we will
continue to demand a systemwide GSHIP that includes (1) the participation of all
ten campuses, (2) a benefits package that is strong enough that all campuses
feel it is in their best interest to participate in the plan, and (3) a consistently
high quality of healthcare across all campuses.
   Moreover, we continue to maintain that the university must bargain any
changes that would occur after September 30, 2010 (the expiration of our
current contract).

In order to achieve these goals as we transition into bargaining over the full
contract, we are taking a straw poll to reaffirm our members’ commitment to our
position regarding GSHIP. Polling began Monday, May 24, and will end on
Thursday, May 27. Furthermore, as we move into the full contract negotiations,
we will have a bargaining kickoff event to demonstrate the importance of our
working conditions on the learning conditions of UC students. This event will
take place on Wednesday, June 2, 2010 from noon to 1pm across all UC
campuses. We will continue to bargain over GSHIP in the successor contract
negotiations based on your reaffirmed commitment.

Polling is happening through member-to-member organizing (on campus, on the
phone, etc.). If you want to weigh in via email, please reply no later than
midnight on Thursday. Please include your full name with your response.

Poll language:
We support UAW 2865’s position that (1) a systemwide GSHIP must have a
benefits package that is strong enough that all campuses feel it is in their best
interest to participate in the plan, and that (2) the quality of healthcare should
be consistent at all campuses. We also support UAW 2865’s position that the
University shall not make any changes to GSHIP after September 30, 2010
without agreement from UAW 2865.

Stay tuned for more detailed information on our planned actions. To find out
how you can be involved, please contact your campus office.

In solidarity,

UAW Local 2865 Bargaining Committee

Molly Ball, Davis Recording Secretary
Kelly Burns, Santa Barbara Recording Secretary
Jorge Cabrera, Santa Barbara Chair
Josh Cho, Irvine Chair
Evelyn Fidler, San Diego Chair
John Gust, Riverside Recording Secretary
Des Harmon, Los Angeles Recording Secretary
Nick Kardahji, Berkeley Recording Secretary
Jessy Lancaster, Santa Cruz Recording Secretary
Juliette Lunger, Los Angeles Chair
Brian Malone, Santa Cruz Chair
David Selby, San Diego Recording Secretary
Jessica Taal, Berkeley Chair

Bron Tamulis, Irvine Recording Secretary
David Willhoite, Riverside Chair
Jesse Woo, Davis Chair

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
UAW 2865 Berkeley
2070 Allston Way, Suite 205
Berkeley, CA 94704
phone: (510) 849-1628  /  fax: (510) 549-2514
berk...@uaw2865.org  /  www.uaw2865.org

mail-list.com    1302 Waugh Dr. #438    Houston, Texas    77019    USA

This message was launched into cyberspace to xxxx...@xxxxx.com

Uh, really? When you call something “straw poll”, don’t you usually have more than one choice? I understand that this “straw poll” would be nonbinding (as all straw polls are), but what they are trying to do here is not get a genuine level of support from UAW 2865 members. What they are trying to do here is goose up fake support (esp. goosed up by union mobs carrying clipboards on campus throughout this week) and call it a “poll”. This sounds more like the poll they conduct in North Korea. You know, vote for Secretary Kim as the new secretary, or don’t vote at all.

Well. I remember what happened last time I signed something than looked innocuous from my beloved UAW 2865. They turned the statement into vicious bullying demands while retaining my name among the signatories. And this statement doesn’t even look innocuous right from the start, so it’s clear what I should do—rip up the paper if anyone hands me one to sign.

P.S. There’s only one thing I want out of GSHIP: I want to be able to opt out of it (and keep the benefits as actual dollars, reduced for tax if necessary). Frankly, I don’t like the pool I am in as a participant in GSHIP, and I can do far better on my own (even after the tax penalty) outside the system.

A friend of mine was complaining that the drug cartel violences just across the border weren’t getting enough media attention.

Well, here’s one less reason to be so worried:

From: Jonathan Poullard Dean of Student <adpa...@berkeley.edu>
Subject: Travel to Mexico Advisory
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2010 13:06:14 -0700

Dear UC Berkeley Students,

In response to the recent security concerns in Mexico, the U.S.
Department of State has issued a travel warning to U.S. travelers
traveling to and living in Mexico. Please read carefully the full
advisory notice at

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_mexico.html

Accordingly, UC Berkeley strongly advises against travel to Mexico
during Spring Break. We encourage students to discuss your travel plans
with family, friends, and other concerned parties as appropriate.

Should you have any further questions regarding your decision to travel,
please contact the Dean of Students Office at 642-6741.

Jonathan Poullard
Assistant Vice Chancellor/Dean of Students

Even if the liberal media is burying the story, afraid what the stories of violence in Mexico (and extending to U.S. citizens) would do to the sentiments towards immigrants and immigration, it looks like at least students at Berkeley will be well informed.

Of course, it’s another question whether the information would fall on deaf ears, but, well, let him who has ears to hear hear.

Update: In the interest of full disclosure, the update email:

From: "Harry Le Grande, Vice Chancellor - Student Affairs (campuswide)"
        <CALm...@berkeley.edu>
To: "Students, " <CALm...@berkeley.edu>
Subject: Travel Advisory to Mexico
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 10:44:57 -0700

Dear UC Berkeley Students,

On Tuesday, March 15, 2009 you received an email from me regarding travel to and
in Mexico during Spring Break. In recent days legitimate concerns have been
expressed that our initial message seemed to suggest that travel to any part of
the country would be ill-advised. This was not my intention. We are, in fact, in
complete agreement with a recent State Department Advisory that warns only
against travel to areas of Mexico that border the United States.

I would ask that you read the full advisory at:

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cis_pa_tw/tw/tw_mexico.html

I also encourage you to discuss your travel plans with family and friends. Your
safety and well-being is an important priority for us, and we just want to be
sure that you have a great Spring Break, no matter where you go.

Should you have any further questions regarding your vacation plans, feel free
to contact the Dean of Students Office at 642-6741.

Jonathan Poullard
Assistant Vice-Chancellor for Student Affairs
and Dean of Students
Campus Life and Leadership
326 Sproul Hall
UC Berkeley
Berkeley, CA 94720-2426
ph: (510) 642-6770
fax: (510) 642-7167
poul...@berkeley.edu

I can’t see how anyone could have misunderstood the first email to mean that the entire country of Mexico is unsafe. I mean, that’s like thinking the entire Indian subcontinent is unsafe just because Kashmir is not a place a tourist would want to go to. But, well, some people don’t know coffee at McDonald’s is hot, so.

Another message from my beloved union (private address redacted):

From: UAW 2865 Berkeley <berk...@uaw2865.org>
To: xxxx...@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: Healthcare Negotiations Beginning; Vote on Initial Demands Feb.
        3rd or 4th
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 18:45:37 +0000 (UTC)

January 20, 2010

Dear UAW 2865 members,

UAW 2865 is preparing to open our current contract with University of
California in order to negotiate improvements to the Graduate Student
Health Insurance Program. We consider UC’s agreement to enter
negotiations on GSHIP as a victory in our years-long struggle to improve
the quality of healthcare that academic student employees receive. In
recent years this struggle has included UC providing vision and dental
coverage as part of all GSHIP plans and the establishment of a UAW-UC
committee which has explored how best to make healthcare
improvements.

All members are encouraged to attend a meeting with bargaining
committee members and to vote on our initial healthcare bargaining
demands on February 3rd or 4th. Campus-specific dates, times, and
locations will be sent out next week.

We are opening healthcare now so we can negotiate changes that would
take effect in August for the 2010-2011 academic year. This would not be
possible under the already scheduled negotiations, because our current
contract expires September 30, 2010 and no changes take effect until the
entire contract is settled and ratified. We still plan to begin our full
set of negotiations in the spring, and there will be a separate process
where members will have a chance to vote on those initial demands as well.

If you have any questions or would like to get involved, please contact us
(info below).

In solidarity,

Bargaining Committee, UAW Local 2865

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
UAW 2865 Berkeley
2070 Allston Way, Suite 205
Berkeley, CA 94704
phone: (510) 849-1628  /  fax: (510) 549-2514
berk...@uaw2865.org  /  www.uaw2865.org

mail-list.com    1302 Waugh Dr. #438    Houston, Texas    77019    USA

This message was launched into cyberspace to xxxx...@xxxxx.xxx

So far, I haven’t participated in any union votes, mainly because I didn’t want to be part of (and hence, at least at my personal level, legitimize) the farcical imitation of democracy, but maybe I should vote.

Why? Well, let’s just say … I’m heartened by the ballot heard around around the world yesterday. If Massachusetts voters can vote for a small-government Republican, perhaps UAW 2865 members can finally say enough is enough—or at least, one day we will get to the bottom of what dirty tactics my beloved union uses to get 99% approvals on its measures.

I just got this email from my beloved union (private email redacted):

From: UAW 2865 Berkeley <berk...@uaw2865.org>
To: xxxx...@xxxxx.xxx
Subject: UAW Job Opportunity
Date: Wed,  6 Jan 2010 00:07:12 +0000 (UTC)

January 5, 2010

UAW is now hiring for social media jobs related to getting the word out about
its various campaigns. If you have experience with social media and think
you have what it takes to make UAW campaigns “go viral,” please send a CV
or resume along with a cover letter that highlights your experience in these
areas to uaw2...@uaw2865.org; attn: Christine Petit. Please also include
your availability for work (part-time or full-time; if part-time
approximately how many hours per week).

Applicants who get their materials in by 5pm on Thursday, January 7 will
have top priority; but because UAW has many ongoing campaigns, we will
consider applications received after that date as well.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
UAW 2865 Berkeley
2070 Allston Way, Suite 205
Berkeley, CA 94705
phone: (510) 849-1628  /  fax: (510) 549-2514
berk...@uaw2865.org  /  www.uaw2865.org

mail-list.com    1302 Waugh Dr. #438    Houston, Texas    77019    USA

This message was launched into cyberspace to xxxx...@xxxxx.xxx

Er, what? Getting the word out about “its various campaigns”? If I know the kind of policies UAW 2865 has supported in the past, I am sure these are the policies I donate money to candidates (usually $100 at a time, when I can afford to) to oppose.

Is this what my dear union wastes my union dues on? Weren’t they supposed to be taking $10 a month from my salary so that they can fight for us at our workplace, not advance radical left-wing agenda? Or am I just expecting too much from the corrupt union leadership?

P.S. No, getting out of the union won’t really fix this problem. Their idea of “fair share” for non-union member is something like $9 per month instead of $10 per month. Either way, it’s more than the amount I pay for any utility besides rent (my cell phone service being the only one, for which I pay $100 a year).

These people are unbelievable.

Signs illegally put up at Wheeler on Dec. 9, 2009

You probably heard about occupation of Wheeler by students (and non-students, as not all protesters were students at UC Berkeley) in the week before Thanksgiving. They caused thousands of students to miss their class—or deal with the extreme inconvenience of re-scheduling at the last moment. These people are trying the same thing again. Just before the finals week.

Apparently their motto is “open university”, “24/7″, “education is a right, not a commodity”, etc. And unless I am reading the wrong news, their goal is to stop the university from raising student fees, force them to keep hiring custodians that it may not need (or at least can afford to lay off, as far as work load goes), and, I don’t know, use black magic to make money when none is forthcoming from the state?

Well. If these people have their way, yes, we will have an open university, as in buildings will be open and classrooms will be open to public (as if they weren’t before; you could, as long as I have been in UC Berkeley, practically walk into any class and “audit” it without paying or any registration; no instructor would have stopped you; it’s the diploma you need to pay for, not education), in fact, if these people have their way, the buildings will even be clean, thanks to a glut of custodians.

Too bad the classrooms will not have competent lecturers and labs will not have prolific researchers. Too bad, after paying for custodians, building upkeep, and not raising student fees to raise necessary funds, the university will not be able to attract the top faculty. Too bad, with all these protests and disruptions to research and education, prospective faculty and students will turn away from UC Berkeley—if they care about education and research.

Support these people if you want UC Berkeley to become a diploma mill. I know their motto is “education is not a commodity”, but well, if they have their way, UC Berkeley diploma will become a commodity, a piece of paper without the prestige it used to carry.

Update: I’m not going to claim all or even most protesters are violent criminals. But given that about 70 of them are, if you support the protesters, you risk supporting criminals who would endanger others’ lives and destroy properties. Is that what you want to do?