Slashdot Mirror

Real men need to learn how to use the apostrophe.

It's hopeless.

(Lameness filter encountered. Post aborted! Reason: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.)

Explain that, just like the US, the only way to have a viable economy is to switch to a knowledge end service economy. Software development is one area where Europe could shine.

The trouble is that policy makers tend to see software patents as a way of promoting software development. Needless to say, it's got something to do with multinationals constantly telling them this over and over again.

Then point out that any incentive to invest in software knowledge for small and medium size companies is pointless when they can be killed instantaneously by large corps with large patent portfolio's.

Patents were originally designed to protect the little guys. The fact that the opposite is true is counter-intuitive.

I think the key is to keep talking about how USA software companies would have a strangehold on software development because they've already patented the basic building blocks, and because the USA is willing to grant patents for virtually anything their software companies come up with, to the detriment of European software companies.

PS: Please don't abuse apostrophes.

"Linux needs to play to it's strength's"

Since when did this sort of writing become acceptable, God fucking damn it?

Fucking learn, you illiterate crack-monkeys.
1) The possessive of "it" is "ITS". It is NOT "it's".
2) To pluralize a noun, YOU DO NOT ADD AN APOSTROPHE. (See Bob)

You fucking half-literate retard! Where did you learn to write like this, and why are people like you setting the standards of online writing, and even writing in general? I hear horror stories of English teachers receiving papers written like your post, and even (horror of horrors) papers turned in with "u" instead of "you", "r" instead of "are", and other usages coined by 12-year-old AOL-using crack babies. What the FUCK is wrong with us!?

Mod me informative! :-)

Bob did it first...

Not to mention flowers, too...

Stop apostrophe abuse now!

S'eriously, every time you ins'ert apostrophe's where they dont belong or leave them out where they do belong, people reading think "what a moron!". So stop looking like a moron, and learn the Englis'h language.

Ah, you say stupid, I say no! Wrong! Totally wrong! ;-)

I would suggest Civilizations's X-Com's Jagged Alliance 2 to name a few.

The Jagged Alliance 2 owned by the X-Com owned by the Civilizations? What? Were you trying for pluralization?

I think it's time to write up a bookmarklet or something that posts this in cases like this. ;)

Please visit the following link for more information.

Bob's Quick Guide to the Apostrophe

Is it impossible to discuss things in a civil manner. Do you really need to prove the other wrong?

Bush and his cronies never expected the country to fall apart so fast. Expensive yes, but they underestimated the hostility and tactics that were to happen afterwards. Basically, under Saddams Regime there have been very strong groups, that are now competing for power.

There's a big difference between motive and Reality. Official motives for the war has been largely fictional and obviously not in par with Reality, thus we witness the consequences of that.

Besides,
Bombs do not love make.

Oh no! It is lovebot!
Run for your lives!

(stolen from Bob the Angry Flower)

Oh no! It is lovebot!
Run for your lives!

(stolen from Bob the Angry Flower)

apostrophes do not make plurals!!

Speaking of flowers, this topic reminds me of this.

There's really not much more to say about the idea of flesh-eating robots.

Time for a quick review of Proper Apostrophe Usage

We've got Bob right here...

There 'ya go...

np: Autechre - Netlon Sentinel (EP7)

... Fifty-foot-high robot controlled by flowers, you say?

Sounds almost like something a certain Bob the Angry Flower would be behind. And if he's behind it, it'll definitely try to enslave humanity. Until he gets bored, of course...

Hooray!

And before you mod me down go read the comic strip, then you'll understand (and then you should mod me up!):

http://angryflower.com/astero.gif

When posting an "it's" vs. "its" correction, one should always post a link to Bob the Angry Flower.

In order to understand why NMD is so stupid, it helps to take a look at global strategy-making in the nuclear age. During the Cold War, the prevailng idea was deterrence based on the principle of Mutually Assured Destruction (the acronyms just keep comin'!). That is, Russia had missiles and America had missiles, so if one launched an attack on the other, he knew that he himself would be wiped out by the retaliatory strike. Nobody wants to commit suicide, so nobody launches that first attack.

Now, with the emergence in the minds of many of America as the sole Superpower, we're out of MAD and into just AD: Assured Destruction. Anybody who attacks America with a missile will be wiped off the face of the Earth. Deterrence, it seems, has become total and one-sided; under these strategic conditions, who would possibly launch an attack of this kind that would require an NMD to shoot down? The stated bad guys are "rogue nations", by which we mean North Korea or Iraq before we took over or whoever gets on our shit list this week. These are nations, suposedly, run by out-of-control lunatics who could at any moment decide to obliterate themselves and their nation in a futile stab at the belly of the Beast, or something. The problem is that the people who run countries tend to have stakes in remaining alive, so the principle of AD means they're not gonna be launching any surprise attacks on us.

Now, there are some people out there who have demonstrated that they *are* willing to kill themselves in order to stab the Beast, those few thousands of people out there who actually fit the label "terrorists". They'd love to launch a missile attack if they could, but they don't run countries so they just don't have any nuclear missiles. If they had a nuke they could very well try to sneak it into a harbor on a boat or something, but there's not much a faulty system of anti-missile-missiles in Alaska is going to be able to do about that.

So why do we need a missile defense system to shoot down missiles nobody's gonna shoot at us? Because make no mistake, the Bushites are rushing the job on this. Incredibly, they're even suspending experimental and test requirements that are supposed to determine if these things actually work in their haste to get some kind of system up and running by, I think, 2005. They're desperate to deploy these systems, insisting on getting stuff that doesn't even work in place as soon as possible, just so they have something. Why? Part of it is simple Greed, of course. Those billions go into well-connected pockets and it's easy to keep the money tap flowing. But I think there's more than that; they really think they're going to need to be able to shoot down missiles somebody's fired at them. But where are those missiles gonna come from?

The stinky secret is that there *is*, in fact, a use for NMD in Bush's sick interpretation of the Assured Destruction world. By the principles of AD, nobody is going to launch a pre-emptive attack on America. Nation leaders have too much to lose and terrorists don't have them. So who would ever fire a nuclear missile at America? Why, somebody who'd already had a nuclear missile fired at them, of course. Deterrence will ensure that nobody launches an attack on you, but if you've already attacked them you can't really expect to deter them any more. The purpose of NMD is to provide a shield, not from pre-emptive attack, but from retaliatory attack from an enemy or its allies. It's to preserve America's ability to use nuclear weapons without fear of consequence.

Despite their ideological fixations and internal history-rewriting, the Bushites must be capable of understanding that America's conventional military is stretched rather thin at the moment. They're bogged down in Iraq, their soldiers are exhausted, and they just don't have a lot of conventional muscle to throw around right now. If something flares up and threatens their interests in a new l

Actually, it should be 80s and 90s because the decades are plural not possessive or a contraction.

Bob's quick guide to the apostrophe

It's always better to explain grammar with visual aids.

I think you should take a look at this before you talk about spelling and grammar any more.

forgot one:
Destroy the Apostrophe

Bob's Quick Guide to the Apostrophe, You Idiots.

I mean, really.

I had to hang this up on the wall at my workplace, not that it did a lick of good.

It didn't have a "commar", or even a comma. It had an apostrophe -- which is also incorrect. ;-)

But don't take my word for it . . . http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif

This calls for Bob's Quick Guide to the Apostrophe, You Idiots.

"everybody's time" -- time belonging everybody. Its a possesive apostrophe. Like "Dave's hat" and "George Bush's foreign policy". "Everybodies" is the plural of "everybody", meaning "more than one everybody". See this cartoon.

Did you even graduate High School?

Suddenly, this seems a lot closer to reality.

Hacker's know Godwin's Law.

Where's Bob the Angry Flower when you need him?

+5 informative for your sig

Who get's away with what?

"does not allow for it to stand up on it's own"

Now, major publications are letting mistakes like this slide into their text. I mourn.

Bob's Quick Guide to Its and It's, You Idiots

And yes, I've had my coffee today!

Kaboom.

Kaboom?

I am lovebot!

A good time to bring out BTAF's guide to the apostrophe, YOU IDIOTS!

Bob the Angry Flower's Quick Guide to the Apostrophe, You Idiots

You need to see this.

mikael:

read this.

CHUDs.

Company's generally like having third-party support contracts.

AAAARGHH!!!!

No real comment, but this seemed topical

The Inner Light

Ok, you get the 's right, and screw up the they're!

Please see:
http://www.angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif