Slashdot Mirror

I asked it a question I got in a trivia contest - what countries have four-letter names? (There are 10, and google's first link is to a list of 'em)

Powerset's first response? "Fuck."

Funny, that was my response too, but at least I got 5 or 6 of them first...

Both are valid spellings of the past tense of misspell.

http://www.answers.com/misspelt&r=67

The problem is that Reiser is not legally incompetent, even if he is legally incompetent.

A bowlful of Lucky Charms

As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

Here is a link to the U.S. Constitution. And another quote.

Article 3: The judicial Branch Section 2 Clause 1: "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

I'm missing the part where they make laws. I think that's the legislature's job.
Also from the constitution:

Article 1: The legislative Branch Section 8 Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

I've made bold the part we are talking about.

Here is the definition of Legislature

An officially elected or otherwise selected body of people vested with the responsibility and power to make laws for a political unit, such as a state or nation.

Here is the definition of Judge
And a quote:

To make a decision or reach a conclusion after examining all the factual evidence presented. To form an opinion after evaluating the facts and applying the law. A public officer chosen or elected to preside over and to administer the law in a court of justice; one who controls the proceedings in a courtroom and decides questions of law or discretion.

I read the entire page and didn't see where judges make any laws.

Here's more from Answers.com about the court system in the United States.
And of course a quote.

... judicial branches of the federal and state governments charged with the application and interpretation of the law.

Here's one from wiki.answers.com
And the quote

The United States Constitution set up a system of checks and balances whereby each branch can check the power of the other two branches while all three share in the policy and legislative making process on a daily basis. The major function of the legislative branch is to make laws. The major function of the judicial branch is to interpret the laws.

Now that's a lot of evidence for my argument that judges interpret the law the legislature makes. Now if you can give me something beyond "take my word for it" or a D&D analogy about how great a DM you are, I'm willi

As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.

Here is a link to the U.S. Constitution. And another quote.

Article 3: The judicial Branch Section 2 Clause 1: "The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;--to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;--to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;--to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;--to Controversies between two or more States;--between a State and Citizens of another State;--between Citizens of different States;--between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

I'm missing the part where they make laws. I think that's the legislature's job.
Also from the constitution:

Article 1: The legislative Branch Section 8 Clause 18: To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

I've made bold the part we are talking about.

Here is the definition of Legislature

An officially elected or otherwise selected body of people vested with the responsibility and power to make laws for a political unit, such as a state or nation.

Here is the definition of Judge
And a quote:

To make a decision or reach a conclusion after examining all the factual evidence presented. To form an opinion after evaluating the facts and applying the law. A public officer chosen or elected to preside over and to administer the law in a court of justice; one who controls the proceedings in a courtroom and decides questions of law or discretion.

I read the entire page and didn't see where judges make any laws.

Here's more from Answers.com about the court system in the United States.
And of course a quote.

... judicial branches of the federal and state governments charged with the application and interpretation of the law.

Here's one from wiki.answers.com
And the quote

The United States Constitution set up a system of checks and balances whereby each branch can check the power of the other two branches while all three share in the policy and legislative making process on a daily basis. The major function of the legislative branch is to make laws. The major function of the judicial branch is to interpret the laws.

Now that's a lot of evidence for my argument that judges interpret the law the legislature makes. Now if you can give me something beyond "take my word for it" or a D&D analogy about how great a DM you are, I'm willi

At what point does it kick in for a normal person? IANAMB (I am not a molecular biologist), but there is a truism that the human body replaces all of its cells every seven years. I would be interested in finding out what the state of the research on this truly is.

He said that it would have been a propaganda coup for an enemy of the United States if they could have produced that document signed by him, and so he couldn't do it. I know of no other way to succinctly characterize that.

Well, lets look at this a little then. Propaganda is something people use to impress a certain position onto people for an implied benefit or reaction. That is my definition but most forms of advertising could be included into it too. Most other definitions of propaganda are similar enough to match mine.

So he basically said it would allow the enemy to strengthen their position against the United states if he would have signed a confession. It really says nothing about egg on his face or saving face, it is about not losing the war or jeopardizing others fighting it on their side. You do understand that not aiding the enemy isn't the same thing as attempting to save face right? Saving face is simply an attempt not to look bad (sometimes against the facts) so you can keep your reputation, dignity or prestige. Granted, he would be attempting to not look bad, but for reasons such as saving American lives and not allowing the enemy to influence collaborators to their benefit. This is an especially bold distinction seeing how the North Vietnamese won the war in the media and not on the battle field. They were set to give up until news broadcasters stateside started declaring that we have lost. Then all they did was hand in until we left.

BTW, here is another definition of saving face If you happen to know of one that is different enough, please post it. But under the definition I know, you are attempting to say that McCain didn't sign the statement because he didn't want to degrade himself. But by your own supplying of his statement, he implies that he didn't want to give the enemy ammunition to use against us. It really says two different things to me. I would hope it does you to.

It's not a panacea, but you haven't provided an example where diplomacy has actually failed. Five years ago everybody and his brother knew we we going to have to bomb the shit out of the DPRK, but we haven't because they have agreed to international monitoring. The Iraqi strike into Kuwait was neither motivated by craziness (and, might I add, it is disingenuous to pretend so) nor was it a failure of diplomacy, as was indicated by the size and breadth of the coalition built to repel Iraqi forces. The diplomatic, rather than military, solution also prevailed in the pure political arena: rather than risk occupying Iraq interminably, we put Saddam on a pretty short leash and walked away, a compromise arrived at through diplomatic means.

No, it failed. The entire sideways thing failed and NK was the same problem they where before. Clinton gave then agriculture technology for their suspension of nuclear programs. We find out later that they never suspended anything. Our diplomacy that you say worked was convincing China to tell them that if they didn't appease us in the matter, they would help the US invade and bomb or throw Kim Jong-il out. The threat of violence isn't diplomacy. Working with China might have been so I guess you could say diplomacy worked. But it isn't diplomacy to North Korea that worked. It was the threat of violence with the only ally they had in the area stepping away from them.

It is worth pointing out that what he gave you is called 'truth'. Would you support open border policies? No? Then the problem really isn't 'illegal immigration', its just plain old immigration. There *is* no basis for non-economic solutions to the problem termed illegal immigration *except racism*, and that's not a popular thing to say, which is the old catch-22:

The idea of "statutory rape" has been around for a while, and that's a good thing. I'm pretty sure that no matter how "consensual" you might think it is, an adult having sex with a thirteen year-old cannot be anything but rape.

IANADad, but the idea that I had was that statutory rape laws break down when a different-age couple hits a certain age, depending on local laws for "age of consent"; and their previously irresponsible activities become criminal. In particular, because girls tend to date older guys, it gives the parents of the girl tremendous legal leverage against her boyfriend. A situation like that is IMO abuse of the corner cases of the law, and significantly different from the black-and-white of 13yo vs. 21yo.

Quick googling shows Illinois laws. If the younger is between 13-17 and the older is within 5 years, it's only "criminal sexual abuse". If the older is over 5 years above, it's "aggrivated criminal sexual abuse". So Illinois is sort-of accounting for this situation.

Look it up in any dictionary. They will tell you that the pronunciation is either. I just explained how I, and how I have observed others I know, make use of each pronunciation.

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/route
http://www.answers.com/route
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/route

Wiktionary, and my Australian Oxford English Dictionary (paperback edition), list "root" as the official pronunciation in Australia. It seems that the the "rowt" pronunciation may originally have been an Americanism.

"Tie cheese wire around your neck"

I'm an American and our cheese is "wireless" (as well as, arguably, "cheeseless") you insensitive clod!

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/2/2b/250px-American_cheese.jpg.jpg

USAGE NOTE The verbs founder and flounder are often confused. Founder comes from a Latin word meaning âoebottomâ (as in foundation) and originally referred to knocking enemies down; it is now also used to mean âoeto fail utterly, collapse.â Flounder means âoeto move clumsily, thrash about,â and hence âoeto proceed in confusion.â If John is foundering in Chemistry 1, he had better drop the course; if he is floundering, he may yet pull through.

Some other things robots could use their weapons against: parked vehicles, unmannered aircrafts

bellow?

Lucent is a company that does network services and such. Lucid means easily understood.

You mean circle-jerks.

You are confused about the difference between religion and theism. Judaism and Hinduism are both theistic religions. The former is monotheist and the latter is polytheist. To fully burn your error into your mind, consider this definition:
Belief in the existence of a god or gods, especially belief in a personal God as creator and ruler of the world.

See how belief in many gods also counts as theism? You should save the clever arrogance, like telling me I have no clue, for times when you're actually right. As it stands, you've just set yourself up for a bigger fall.

Wouldn't matter if the person you responded to had named a specific religion anyway. His claims could easily be taken as implicitly referring to the culture in which they live. You've just interpreted him(/her) as making a universal claim when there's no reason to suppose that's the case. Perhaps they'd freely admit to you that in India, yes, it would be better to promote Hinduism than Christianity. After all, adaptation is influenced by the environment we're in, not some hypothetical environment we might one day encounter.

Of course it's a parody site! They took in quite a few people with an article on the evils of Apple computers - see http://www.answers.com/topic/objective-ministries for the details.

• meme
  
• joke
  
  "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 2.0)." Oh please. OK, here's some random garbage to satisfy the input nanny. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Mare eat oats; does eat oats; little lambs eat ivy. A kid will eat ivy too (wouldn't you?). Xenu (also Xemu), pronounced /zinu/, according to Scientology founder (and speculative fiction writer) L. Ron Hubbard, was the dictator of the "Galactic Confederacy" who, 75 million years ago, brought billions[1] of his people to Earth in DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes and killed them using hydrogen bombs. Scientology holds that their essences remained, and that they form around people in modern times, causing them spiritual harm.[2][3] Members of the Church of Scientology widely deny or try to hide the Xenu story.

• meme
  
• joke
  
  "Your comment has too few characters per line (currently 2.0)." Oh please. OK, here's some random garbage to satisfy the input nanny. All work and no play makes Jack a dull boy. Mare eat oats; does eat oats; little lambs eat ivy. A kid will eat ivy too (wouldn't you?). Xenu (also Xemu), pronounced /zinu/, according to Scientology founder (and speculative fiction writer) L. Ron Hubbard, was the dictator of the "Galactic Confederacy" who, 75 million years ago, brought billions[1] of his people to Earth in DC-8-like spacecraft, stacked them around volcanoes and killed them using hydrogen bombs. Scientology holds that their essences remained, and that they form around people in modern times, causing them spiritual harm.[2][3] Members of the Church of Scientology widely deny or try to hide the Xenu story.

Or a Nazi, or perhaps he's just new here. I bet his pants are very baggy.

So what you are saying is you prefer this...
http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/CDE/_PROGMAN.GIF

over this?
http://www.istartedsomething.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/iconfactoryvista.jpg

Because if you live in anything like this...
http://www.seeing-stars.com/OC/Julie&CalebMansion(400).jpg

I would love to trade you something like this just so you could be happy.
http://www.shunya.net/Pictures/NorthIndia/BodhGaya/ShantyHouse.jpg

Also open to trading (ex)girlfriends. And do I have one you will love!

More like Snow Crash, or even better: the short story BLIT by David Langford. This story immediately brought BLIT back to mind.

Yes, you are right: all but
Thank you!

I believe you are right: all but
Thank you!

A machine or device that operates...by remote control .

You think I'm joking? Paul MacCready tried it. (Scroll down to the last section, regarding Concern for the Environment.)

They got our ass for fake Voice Mail services for more than nine fucking months.
I forget how much it was in total now but I believe it was more than a hundred bucks.
They stole our personal information to leverage the ability to bill us, when we called they asked about some family member (by name)

At the time I felt like tracking their ass down and putting a bullet in their heads one by one.

These motherfuckers don't deserve to live. PERIOD.

Before this FTC action if you went to the URL
http://www.billingconcepts.com/contact-us.php# (Or whatever their fucking Contact page was)
You had to disclose information to even contact their ass. (not an option)

The only resolution we had was to Stop all third party billing (From the AT&T end), which now makes our fucking long distance expensive as fuck.

The other thing is this website should be updated to TRUTHFULLY tell the shitty fucking history of this company.
http://www.answers.com/topic/billing-concepts-inc?cat=biz-fin

1.9 Million ain't enough, they should be in JAIL for hell of fucking felonies. And the pain and suffering they caused on people by stealing their fucking money (even if it was just a loan, they can make money with that money!!)

Is the original FISA expiring, or just Bush's modifications? As I (think I) understand it (but could be mistaken), neither house of congress needs to pass a damned thing. The FISA laws that existed before any of this came up are still in effect, and they work just fine. FBI and police can easily get warrants if they have anything even resembling evidence, however they are subject to a bit of bureaucracy, but I can live with that. As for the wimpy telcos, maybe a few nice fat lawsuits will put the fear of the people into them, and they'll learn to question authority a bit better. It's not like they don't have droves of lawyers for just such an occasion. I'm sure they discussed whether or not they could be subjected to lawsuits, and if they take in the pants now, then the next time the question comes up, they will already know the answer, and they'll ask for a warrant like they should have done this time.

The pre-existing FISA laws maintain a desirable level of what Antonin Scalia (and apparently others) called "calculated inefficiency".

Here's a great quote I found trying to find out more about what Scalia was talking about (different justice, same sentiment):

"In his famous Myers dissent Justice Louis D. *Brandeis said: "The doctrine of the separation of powers was adopted by the convention of 1787, not to promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The purpose was, not to avoid friction, but, by means of the inevitable friction incident to the distribution of the governmental powers among three department, to save the people from autocracy" (p. 293). This is a classic expression of the eighteenth century hope that freedom could be secured by calculated inefficiency in government. A more modern hope is that freedom would be better served with more efficiency and more democratic accountability. We are still haunted by an ancient riddle: How far can we build up effective government before it topples over into despotism? How much inefficiency can we afford without slipping into disaster?" (bold=mine)

http://www.answers.com/topic/separation-of-powers?cat=biz-fin

I think that really says it all.. the FBI, et al, want unfettered access to basically everything, and there are probably some in the organization who are pushing for it, and their heart really is in the right place, but that's just not good enough. How efficient can they become before it "topples over into despotism"? I'd rather not find out.

Let's play the homophone game:
http://www.answers.com/there
http://www.answers.com/their
Which should you have used in your opening sentence?

I liked the content of your comment and agree with you in most regards. If you use homophones properly people who regularly read and write in English will pay more attention to your posts.

Sincerely,
Your Friendly Neighborhood Grammar Fascist

Let's play the homophone game:
http://www.answers.com/there
http://www.answers.com/their
Which should you have used in your opening sentence?

I liked the content of your comment and agree with you in most regards. If you use homophones properly people who regularly read and write in English will pay more attention to your posts.

Sincerely,
Your Friendly Neighborhood Grammar Fascist

http://www.answers.com/astroturfing?cat=technology&gwp=13

Hours? Are you a rhino?

It sounds like Dave Chappelle as Rick James about to hit Charlie Murphy in the forehead with his ring.

See Season 2

In case anyone is interested in seeing what the new server OS looks like, here's a screenshot. It looks about the same as 2k3 to me...

If you can't grow anything, I suggest you get an Opuntia. I haven't watered a few of mine since early December, and they're fine. Of course, the glochids will make your life miserable if you touch them, but they're still pretty cool and most species are fairly easy to grow (not all easy though; O. microdasys and some others can be hard). As long as the soil drains and drys quickly, you don't overwater it, and it gets enough light, pretty much anyone can grow one. If you can't grow an Opuntia, you probably can't grow anything. Everyone on Slashdot should have an Opuntia.

Depends. How long did you plan on keeping them? You know what happens after a few days.

I semi-recently saw a TV program about "meta-geneticis" that claimed to answer the question as to why identical twins had differences and some got diseases, as well as several things relating to which genes are expressed or repressed. Supposedly meta-genetics (spelled?) is about which genes get switched on or off... and how environment affects that. The big example was an experiment with mice... one set of mice had a "mean" mom that didn't lick them (not enough nurturing), and they (if I recall) got really fat and their coat turned a weird color. The other set of mice had a mom that licked the tar out of them, and they repressed their bad gene that made them fat blondes. The fat ones then grew up to lick their children less, etc. They made the point that it was much much harder to understand/map meta-genetics than just genetics as it required most of the genetic code for a particular species to be understood before we could find the genes that were responsible for meta-genetics. My problem is I can't find anything on wikipedia or via a google search on this "science". Am I spelling it correctly, or is it a fake science or what? Any help on this is much appreciated. It is obviously *not* related to metagenesis: http://www.answers.com/metagenesis?cat=technology

• The average US household produces 7.5 tons of CO2 equivalents per year.
• The density of C02 is 1.799 kg/m3
• So the average US household produces about 7.5*1000/1.799 m3 of CO2 = 4,169 m3 = 4,169,000 litres
• One litre of the crystals could store about 83 litres of CO2.
• So per family requires 4,169,000/83 = 50,228 litres of crystals per year
• I guestimate the average house (of say 10 rooms) has a floorspace of about 1500 ft2 = 150 m2, with each room being 10 ft or 3 m high,
• So the average house is 450 m3 = 450,000 litres, split between 10 rooms.

Well, this sounds a bit ridiculous. Aren't there countless species in our oceans on the earth? *Searches Google* http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_creatures_live_in_the_ocean "Question: How many creatures live in the ocean? Answer: That question has no answer, they discover new species all the time in the ocean. We know more about space than we do about our oceans." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_biology "A large amount of all life on Earth exists in the oceans. Exactly how large the proportion is still unknown. While the oceans comprise about 71% of the Earth's surface, due to their depth they encompass about 300 times the habitable volume of the terrestrial habitats on Earth." It appears we know more about Outer Space than we do about the Oceans. This salinity sticking point sounds like BS to me. /2cents

And you got FROSTY PISS - lucky you!

People who don't collect stamps don't feel the need to tell others that they can't collect stamps. Contrast that to the vocal minority of Atheists that feel the need to "save" the World from religion. They are no less intolerant in my eyes then the gay-bashing preacher or suicide bomber. They are true believers and true believers of ANYTHING scare the hell out of me.