Slashdot Mirror

I just come to realize that there are approx 800+ books available in Google Print. Why don't they also cache the books and book lists from The Online Books Page at Penn Library (~20000+ listings)? They have links to books like: Relativity HTML or Gutenberg text by Albert Einstein, Bibles 94 items found, etc...

Compared to say socialism

Or this page analyzing the downfalls of communism in practice anti-communism

A summary of Marx's criticism of capitalism

Now assuming a person reads these and other articles about what communism is and compare it to OSS, it's damn obvious the two are not equal or remotely equal. the worse part of it is the main stream media often have people talking about capitalism, when they barely understand the differences. Hell many of them don't understand the principle of supply and demand.

Compared to say socialism

Or this page analyzing the downfalls of communism in practice anti-communism

A summary of Marx's criticism of capitalism

Now assuming a person reads these and other articles about what communism is and compare it to OSS, it's damn obvious the two are not equal or remotely equal. the worse part of it is the main stream media often have people talking about capitalism, when they barely understand the differences. Hell many of them don't understand the principle of supply and demand.

Bartleby (channeling the Columbia Encyclopaedia) claims that Pascal did indeed say that, which agrees with my recollection.

Does Qt require royalty payments? No.

However, if you make a commercial closed source product (and do not wish to use the GPL) you will need to buy a one-time commercial Qt license for the developers that work on your product.

You can read more about commercial Qt licensing here.

So next time you hear someone talk about Qt royalties you now know that that person either doesn't know what he is talking about or he is trying to sell you a bridge.

http://www.bartleby.com/66/11/32611.html

~Berj

The term piracy has been used to refer to unauthorized use of copyrighted materials for more than 150 years. This definition appears in any reasonable dictionary, even going back to 1828.

So get over it, already. It's piracy.

> Are "commentaries" like his the sad, pathetic result of not working on an OS that "just works"?

so, in short, The lady doth protest too much.

After five seconds of googling: "Latin tu quoque, you also".

For anything of this nature, Latin should always be your first guess.

There is no such language as 'Anglo-Saxon' -- it is a combination of the names of the two ethnic groups that made of the dominant majority of England, namely the Angles and the Saxons.

This map of the indo-european language family tree should give you a better idea of how the languages are related.

On a side note, most of the traditional Occult Sciences (alchemy, astrology etc.) were, like some fields of physics, models of how the universe works based primarly upon observation with little experimentation. As our observational abilities increased, and our extended abilities to do experiments on things that were previously only observable came to light, these occult sciences morphed into hard sciences. The important thing to note, is that there is NO LINE between the two.

occult: 1. Of, relating to, or dealing with supernatural influences, agencies, or phenomena. 2. Beyond the realm of human comprehension; inscrutable. 3. Available only to the initiate; secret: occult lore. See synonyms at mysterious. 4. Hidden from view; concealed.

science:
1a. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition.2000.

On a side note, most of the traditional Occult Sciences (alchemy, astrology etc.) were, like some fields of physics, models of how the universe works based primarly upon observation with little experimentation. As our observational abilities increased, and our extended abilities to do experiments on things that were previously only observable came to light, these occult sciences morphed into hard sciences. The important thing to note, is that there is NO LINE between the two.

occult: 1. Of, relating to, or dealing with supernatural influences, agencies, or phenomena. 2. Beyond the realm of human comprehension; inscrutable. 3. Available only to the initiate; secret: occult lore. See synonyms at mysterious. 4. Hidden from view; concealed.

science:
1a. The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.

The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition.2000.

then why don't you look it up? in less than 60 seconds on google ... wait, you probably don't know how to use a search engine, either. sorry. not only are the youth of today ignorant, but willfully so -- they can't be bothered to find answers. it's so much easier to just be snide, isn't it? horse opera

Yes lo-res by today's standards but for TV at that time it was cool

my first response is, "so what?" that may be interesting from a sociological standpoint but it's irrelevant from the standpoint of creating -- or recreating -- a movie based on the galactica premise. watching the reruns is a mix of boredom, embarrassment and laughter. my second response is, the show was a flop when it ran originally and, in retrospect, it's easy to see why. evidently, it wasn't all that "cool" in its own time zone, either.

it should be noted that most sci-fi over the last 50 years (sometimes sarcastically referred to as "space opera") is, in fact, very much akin to the "horse opera" genre. that in itself is not necessarily a bad thing -- good writing generally makes for good reading or good watching. (there've been a zillion rewrites of the "lost patrol" theme, from "duel at diablo," "valdez is coming," "the steel helmet" -- but "alien" was still a great movie.) but the "wagon train in space" theme is shopworn. it'll be tough for sci-fi channel to refresh it.

mp

How'd you come up with that definition?

Hey thanks for questioning my presuppositions, and I'm not above admitting when I'm wrong. "Revenue" is almost always defined in terms of tax income, as seen in these definitions:

1
2
3
4
5

However, I disagree that it's like your landlord: you entered into contract with your landlord willingly after considering your options. I was born here. (And as other respondents have pointed out, "I can just move" is not a valid response to people who are discussing how to change the democracy for the better.)

it makes it easy for big corporations with deep pockets to keep the little guy from being a nuisance/competitor

It's much more than that. Often, "big corporations" aren't the licensees of the data; smaller entities are (such as is the case in many state data distribution contracts, e.g. DMV databases which are auctioned off like radio spectrum in an irresponsible manner). Subsequently, the "evil big corporation" matter is a red herring. We need to keep the eye on the fundamental - the government's aspiration to implement a Stationer's register system that requires the authority of the crown in order to access public information. Imagine the absolute power politicians will have in defining who can and cannot see public records.

Per the original post's critique link:

H.R. 3261 ...would create a new federal property right in online and offline databases (collections of information), and give the federal courts power to police the use of information in databases.

This is much more than a theft of public information (again, mirroring the FCC's approach to spectrum auctions). Much of this government information is necessary for ensuring compliance. Imagine, for instance, if driving laws were maintained in a Federal database, but access to that database required a $25,000 annual fee.

Failure to have access to this database would result in recurring noncompliance; e.g. making normal citizens recurring lawbreakers.

Certainly many politicians aspire to extend a political system that ensures all citizens are lawbreakers and subsequently dependents upon the system. Concealing public information which is necessary for legal compliance is a terrible move towards tyranny.

H.R. 3261 would allow federal courts to impose stiff penalties if someone uses information from a database that a corporation claims to own.

Almost sounds like it was written by Kafka:

"I'm sorry sir, but to divulge what crime you have been charged with, absent proper licensing and permitting of your access to the Federal crimes database, would be a crime of itself. Certainly you wouldn't wish to compound matters, would you?"

Incidentally, I see that Rep. Billy Tauzin, known as the loyal Representative from BellSouth, is a cosponsor of this bill. Good rule of thumb: if Billy's involved, it's probably not on the level.

*scoove*

Hmmm. I think these really-really small bacteria suspended in a liqiud medium don't care too much about the gravity. You know, they are so small the impact of individual molecules makes them shake. (see Brownian movement Yet we see these effects, apparantly....(I'd really like to see these effects being reproduced by another group) I don't think its that simple somehow....

You mean like the US did so succesfully in Iran. Don't kid yourself, most European powers would now what to do with some yankee commandoes.

In the real world we keep score. Benchmarks are a way of keeping score. Market share is a way of keeping score. And CC certification is a way of keeping score. It helps separate the winners from the losers. That is the way things are. Always has been that way, and always will. Except of couse in PC kindergarten.

CC certification is a good thing.

footnote: see Aesop's fable of the fox and the grapes for further insight.

American Heritage

Sorry, but that's nonsense.

To be pedantic: the use of the word "socket" as a verb is only found in modern American or colloquial English. Look up "socket" in a British or International English dictionary and you will see it listed as a noun only. e.g. http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=754 42&dict=CALD

The "1533" listed in your reference (Merriam-Webster -- a modern American english dictionary) refers only to the usage of the word "socket" itself, and most definitely does NOT refer to the specific application of the word as a transitive verb. The unfortunate listing of the date under the verb is misleading. (A side-effect of a database-driven website blindly serving data without context or deeper understanding, I suppose. See http://www.bartleby.com/61/88/S0528800.html for a better presentation).

See http://www.m-w.com/dates.htm -- dates for first recorded occurrence are not related to the actual meaning of the word in modern English.

You can also see the 1828 definition here. Note that in 1828 the word is not listed as a verb.

Check the etymology in a more complete source than an online dictionary to see what I mean...

Wow, guess I got a bit carried away with this reply. I think I'm turning into some kind of language lawyer or "word addict". :o

In short, "cashay" is the correct pronunciation, "cash" is incorrect but accepted.

That's not what the american heritage book of english usage says says

(And by the way, please don't split your infinitives. I know that an excess of Star Trek does that to people, but it grates on the rest of us.) "

Split infinitives have been condemned as ungrammatical for nearly 200 years, but it is hard to see what exactly is wrong with saying to boldly go. Its meaning is clear. It has a strong rhythm than reinforces the meaning. And rearranging the phrase only makes it less effective.

In fact, the split infinitive is distinguished both by its length of use and the greatness of its users. People have been splitting infinitives since the 14th century, and some of the most noteworthy splitters include John Donne, Samuel Pepys, Daniel Defoe, Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Johnson, William Wordsworth, Abraham Lincoln, George Eliot, Henry James, and Willa Cather.


From: The American Heritage(R) Book of English Usage.

Your Link is not relevent because THAT dictionary does not contain the word in the context of the computer device. Context of a word is very important.

The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of the English Language
Dictionary.com

Free software such as Linux is better because it's free

John Milton wrote an essay about this freedom (in a broader sense) called Areopagetica. It's one of those things journalism majors usually have to wade through their senior year in mass communication history.

In his time, one in Britain could not print without prior authorization from the crown. The King's official reason for this prohibition was to "protect libel from being spread." Milton argued that it took the public grappling of truth against falsehood to determine what really was true. Without this public airing, you simply could not know whether the facts you had were true or not.

The closed source vs. open source issue, especially from the perspective of code security and reliability, is inherently linked to this issue argued nearly 400 years ago by Milton. There simply is no way Microsoft can expose its proprietary code to the inspections open source benefits from. The result is horribly broken, insecure and crash-prone Microsoft code vs. a base of increasingly stable open source.

And the future gets worse for Microsoft. Complexity is the instigator of this dynamic; as software complexity grows, the ability of closed source to hang on evaporates.

*scoove*

Kind of funny, since French is typically more resistant to change, whereas English will happily hypenate then combine words (e.g., to[day|morrow].

The word "limb" in this sense comes from latin limbus, "border." Its meanings in English all have to do with the edge of a round object.

Oddly enough, the more common meaning of limb is actually a different word, spelled "lim" in Old English. This etymology page says that the "b" appeared in the 16th century for no apparent reason, though American Heritage says that it was probably picked up from the other "limb."

So unlike other separate words pronounced alike, such as everyone's favorite their/there pair, limb and lim wound up being spelled the same by someone's mistake.

It's wierd that people so vehemently defend correct spellings, given that so many of them originated as mistakes some time in the past.

- Peter

The word "limb" in this sense comes from latin limbus, "border." Its meanings in English all have to do with the edge of a round object.

Oddly enough, the more common meaning of limb is actually a different word, spelled "lim" in Old English. This etymology page says that the "b" appeared in the 16th century for no apparent reason, though American Heritage says that it was probably picked up from the other "limb."

So unlike other separate words pronounced alike, such as everyone's favorite their/there pair, limb and lim wound up being spelled the same by someone's mistake.

It's wierd that people so vehemently defend correct spellings, given that so many of them originated as mistakes some time in the past.

- Peter

To moot means to bring up for discussion. The word has fallen out of usage in American English (at least).

The adjective moot is originally a legal term going back to the mid-16th century. It derives from the noun moot, in its sense of a hypothetical case argued as an exercise by law students. Consequently, a moot question is one that is arguable or open to debate. But in the mid-19th century people also began to look at the hypothetical side of moot as its essential meaning, and they started to use the word to mean "of no significance or relevance." Thus, a moot point, however debatable, is one that has no practical value. A number of critics have objected to this use, but 59 percent of the Usage Panel accepts it in the sentence The nominee himself chastised the White House for failing to do more to support him, but his concerns became moot when a number of Republicans announced that they, too, would oppose the nomination. When using moot one should be sure that the context makes clear which sense is meant.

-- The American Heritage Dictionary

Here's a clue for free: Palestinians are Semites

Oooh! Free clues being given out! Sign me up! Just make the clues accurate, please:

Anti-semitism is an English word that means:

1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism. 2. Discrimination against Jews.

Words' meanings aren't always derived from a literal interpretation of their parts.

That said, I completely agree with your point that unfounded accusations of anti-semitism are terribly inappropriate. One can disagree with, nay even hate the government of Israel without harboring any anti-semitism at all.

(Likewise, one should be able to hate the current administration of the US without being labeled anti-patriotic or an "evildoer" there.)

Of course, that's no fun -- it's much easier just to box people into little labels.

- Peter

A calorie is the amount of heat required to raise 1 gram of pure water at +4C to +5C under 1 atm pressure.

I've had quite a few short managers over the years. In fact, for both of my previous employers, the owner would be considered 'short.'

The 'napoleon complex' is reasonably well documented, and height can obviously be a motivating factor. (in these cases, perhaps to overcompensate or overachieve). If extreme deficiency in height can be a motivating factor, it seems logical that height (esp. above-average height) should be as well.

I'm successful. Especially when you consider my demographic. I owe a lot of it to competence, sure, but the level I have reached is due solely to confidence. While I'm only slightly above average height, I'm extremely confident, especially about things at which I excel. In order to be making the salary I am, I had to get on a track that would put me here, and that has required my holding fast to the salary requests I've made.

When I change employers I set a high, but realistic target salary, and I know I'm worth it. It's only the confidence in myself and my abilities which has allowed me to do this.

The first amendment says nothing about recognizing religion. For example, suspending alternate-side-of-street parking on religious holidays recognizes that religions exist without promoting or disparaging them in any way, which I think would be permissible.

The heart of the matter is what it means to establish a religion. Adding a reference to a deity in a semi-official loyalty oath is establishing religion to my mind, even if congress was not outrageous enough to promote a specific religion.

Also, since you seem to be a prescriptivist, I couldn't resist informing you of your incorrect use of 'hopefully.' See http://www.grammarmudge.cityslide.com/page/page/22 5103.htm#3591 or http://www.bartleby.com/61/41/H0274100.html for more information.

Isn't the technical term for a hardened POS a coprolite? I guess that really fits when it comes from a dinosaur like SCO.

Those figures change dramatically when you consider per capita GNP. In reality the US per capita aid level is one of the cheapest donor levels of any industrialized nation.

Foreign AID as percentage of GDP
Per capita GDP
Lets put it this way, the average dane spends almost 8 times the amount of money in real dollars average american does.

No one hates the US because they are sucessful. I don't hate most european countries that have similar per capita GDPs. People hate the US because they are arrogant and have a horrible record for supporting and aiding vicious reigmes. (Pol Pot, Sadam Hussein, bin Laden, Taliban,El Salvador, etc)

Let me know about a 3rd world country the US rebuilt that they didnt blow to shit first.

Whoever convinced americans that they lived on the best country on earth really pulled the wool over their eyes as to what a good country can be.

If you ever get a chance or are actually interested in what the US stands for pull their voting record from the UN and look how many abstentions and votes against UN resolutions against colonization and terrorism the US has cast.

Webster's is so pathetic. I suggest you use Bartleby.com

laissez faire

I do appreciate being corrected. I searched for it before I put it as my .sig, but I didn't think about Bartlett's. It is free at www.bartleby.com.
Right now the .sig is a few character short of the 120 character limit, and it's misquoted, so I'll probably end up changing it.

It may not be too late to Give Florida Back to Spain.
I think we may still have the Receipt around here somehwhere...

On the other hand, at an average height of just 4 feet above sea level, this may be Governor Jeb's covert attempt at "wetlands" reclamation.

What is the proper name for "imperial" anyway?

In the US, they are more commonly referred to as English units .

NOUN: Inflected forms: pl. people
1. Humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers: People were dancing in the street. I met all sorts of people.

And for people quote

NOUN: 1. A living human. Often used in combination: chairperson; spokesperson; salesperson. 2. An individual of specified character: a person of importance. 3. The composite of characteristics that make up an individual personality; the self. 4. The living body of a human: searched the prisoner's person. 5. Physique and general appearance. 6. Law A human or organization with legal rights and duties. 7. Christianity Any of the three separate individualities of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as distinguished from the essence of the Godhead that unites them. 8. Grammar a. Any of three groups of pronoun forms with corresponding verb inflections that distinguish the speaker (first person), the individual addressed (second person), and the individual or thing spoken of (third person). b. Any of the different forms or inflections expressing these distinctions. 9. A character or role, as in a play; a guise: "Well, in her person, I say I will not have you" (Shakespeare).

So, person == singular, people == plural. People as a collective is a secondary usage, such as "those American people", and still means more than one person, as opposed to, say "that Canadian person" :-)

NOUN: Inflected forms: pl. people
1. Humans considered as a group or in indefinite numbers: People were dancing in the street. I met all sorts of people.

And for people quote

NOUN: 1. A living human. Often used in combination: chairperson; spokesperson; salesperson. 2. An individual of specified character: a person of importance. 3. The composite of characteristics that make up an individual personality; the self. 4. The living body of a human: searched the prisoner's person. 5. Physique and general appearance. 6. Law A human or organization with legal rights and duties. 7. Christianity Any of the three separate individualities of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as distinguished from the essence of the Godhead that unites them. 8. Grammar a. Any of three groups of pronoun forms with corresponding verb inflections that distinguish the speaker (first person), the individual addressed (second person), and the individual or thing spoken of (third person). b. Any of the different forms or inflections expressing these distinctions. 9. A character or role, as in a play; a guise: "Well, in her person, I say I will not have you" (Shakespeare).

So, person == singular, people == plural. People as a collective is a secondary usage, such as "those American people", and still means more than one person, as opposed to, say "that Canadian person" :-)

They need to do what all the bong makers do, and they know it damn well. They need to market their products as being totally legal, and market the legal uses only. Then, they need to get some indy movie-maker to go and make a movie glorifying downloading music and movies and software and crap, ala CheechNChong.

Perhaps you missed the story about Tommy Chong getting nine months in the Federal Pen, courtesy of John Ashcroft.

among the arguments for sentencing the 65 year old to jail, rather than to a lesser sentence, was his lese majeste , in that he "grew wealthy glamorizing drug use and trivializing law enforcement in his films of the late 1970s and early 1980s."

In other words, you get a harsher sentence if you thumb your nose at Ashcroft's values, even if it's in a satirical movie presumably protected by the 1st Amendment.

Let's all feel safe that violent terrorist Tommy Chong has been locked up, and that Ashcroft has targetted a pornographer for 50 years in the Pen.

Osama who?

Hey, John Ashcroft has bigger fish to fry than Osama.

A few helpful links from Google.

On the activist front, here's a suggestion for a protest chant:

Hey, hey, RIAA, how many kids did you sue today?

I know, I know. They actually sued her mother. But I don't think the general public will make that difference.

Yeah...I know. Just being picky (and offtopic).

Unless AIDS has dramatically increased in the past few years, it doesn't even make the top tell killers list in the US.

Here are some links:
AIDS deaths by country
Power Point presentation for cancer(page 2 has the top killers in the US).

Wow. Could you be more annoying? You sure are annoying. I mean, only an annoying person would keep putting the same annoying link in his or her post to point out (annoyingly, I might add) something that's such an annoying waste of time in the first place. It's almost like you're TRYING to be annoying.

Wow. Could you be more annoying? You sure are annoying. I mean, only an annoying person would keep putting the same annoying link in his or her post to point out (annoyingly, I might add) something that's such an annoying waste of time in the first place. It's almost like you're TRYING to be annoying.

Wow. Could you be more annoying? You sure are annoying. I mean, only an annoying person would keep putting the same annoying link in his or her post to point out (annoyingly, I might add) something that's such an annoying waste of time in the first place. It's almost like you're TRYING to be annoying.

Wow. Could you be more annoying? You sure are annoying. I mean, only an annoying person would keep putting the same annoying link in his or her post to point out (annoyingly, I might add) something that's such an annoying waste of time in the first place. It's almost like you're TRYING to be annoying.