Slashdot Mirror

You mean facetious.

Actually, Jon's flaw is this.

I found this link far more descriptive.

This might put things in perspective.

I went here and learned all about it.

I found some more information here.

More information here.

Only you aren't. misremember

from dictionary.com

emulate (my-lt)
tr.v. emulated, emulating, emulates
1. To strive to equal or excel, especially through imitation: an older pupil
whose accomplishments and style I emulated.
2. To compete with successfully; approach or attain equality with.
3. Computer Science. To imitate the function of (another system), as by modifications to hardware or software that allow the imitating system to accept the same data, execute the same
programs, and achieve the same results as the imitated system.(emphasis mine)

Someone explain to me how wine does not fit definition #3?(I have nothing against WINE. I just don't see how it isn't an emulator.)

I have a feeling you don't know what a light-year is. I'll let you look it up on Dictionary.com.

Nugatory means: Of little or no importance; trifling.

It was also Word of the Day on Sept 5, 2000.

according to this defintion of terroism:

terrorism :The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

This definition reminds me of a terrorist incident that was partly responsible for the beginning of this supposedly "great" nation and that is the Boston Tea Party. While I deplore the actions of Osma Bin Laden, how are his actions any different than what the Sons of Liberty did in Boston harbor? They both had a ideological and political reasons for their actions.

Americans love to hide behind their protective sheild of patriotism and democracy. As a country Americans have commited many acts of terrorism against other countries (i.e. Veitnam), but since they were cloaked under the sheild of patriotims and democracy these actions have been deemed acceptable by the greater popluation of america

Well you can define those terms that way if you want to. Stalin considered himself a socialist, so I consider him a socialist. I think Stalin's definition is definition that dictionaries use.

Generally, "the workers" are the government when this is tried in practice, so there no distinction among "real world" socialism. Your citations agree that "true socialism" (as you call it) "on a national level has never been tried anywhere in the world."

I'm afraid that if you want to speak about ficticious forms of government, then it's you that will have to pick new terminolgy.

I argued why OSS was capitalist. My arguement applies equally well if the workers own the copyright or if it's a work for hire owned by a company. The fact that the latter occurs proves OSS is not "true socialism" according to your definition. By the way, I wonder what you think about the fact that the FSF often is given outright copyright ownership for GPL works. Would this make free software an act of "Stalinism" with RMS as dictator in your view?

"there hopeless" what? There hopeless lie the ignorant masses?

Oh, did you mean "they're"?

At least you don't sound like a complete idiot.

(tig)

Oh yeah, I download Windows updates with my Mac when necessary. Why do you expect people to know that IE is necessary to download an update? Where exactly does MS, loquacious bunch that they are, tell us, Joe Public, that?

I didn't say it was a tag, I said it reminded me of one. You may find this link illuminative.

facistic is different from fascist. both are adjectives

But the real difference between "facist" (FAY-sihst) and "fascist" (FASH-ihst) is that "facist" refers to discrimination based on surface features, especially the appearance of the face, whereas "fascist" refers to a totalitarian government. Fascism often includes facism or other racism.

possible but unlikely...

we are talking about gay boy taco.

this or this

this or this

Antipathy , not apathy

Antipathy , not apathy

I agree. A true monopoly could charge whatever it wanted for it's products. If Microsoft was a true monopoly, then it could charge $500 for the upgrade version of Windows XP. But it can't because it knows people would flock to Apple or Linux to escape the prices.

Dictionary.com's definition of monopoly says it all: "A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party."

Personally? Naaaaah.

You!

I say if the X-box is crashing this much it's pretty much DOA already. .

Terrorism: The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons. (from dictionary.com)

Sabotage: 1.(omitted) 2. Treacherous action to defeat or hinder a cause or an endeavor; deliberate subversion.

I Agree. Viruses are not terrorism (Unless maybe if a virus was purposely targeted to kill people via airtraffic control or hospital records). A computer virus is more akin to wreaking the productivity of a factory by dropping a wrench into the machinery. They are inconvenient, disruptive, and even damaging but hardly make you fear for life and limb.

DD

Lets say that some MS bully punched me the other day for running Linux. Can I call him a personal terrorist because he was trying to intimidate me into using Windows? And since he is now a terrorist can I have the government punish him the same as they would somebody who brings down buildings?

I would always spell it aluminium; not because I'm british or anything, but because that's how it's spelled in my language (and probably other languages as well).

n. Chiefly British
Variant of aluminum.

Sheesh, /. really is US centric. This is the common spelling and pronunciation in many countries. I know it's off topic, but someone had to say it. Incorrect spelling, huh :)!

Your mania for bureaucracy

Your blind faith in authority

Your ineptitude at the task of justfying your assertions

Your reliance on ad-hominem bluster in the face of opposition

Why didn't you just SAY that you worked for the Government? (Too efficient?)

Hate to correct a nitpick... but...

Effect is both a noun -and- a verb.

From Dictionary.com:

tr.v. effected, effecting, effects
1. To bring into existence.
2. To produce as a result.
3. To bring about.

There's also a usage note that's somewhat illustrative:

Affect and effect have no senses in common.

As a verb affect is most commonly used in the sense of "to influence" (how smoking affects health).

Effect means "to bring about or execute": layoffs designed to effect savings.

Tingler- Dictionary carrying English speaker. I have no tolerance for poor spelling.

On the ironic note

While you're there, check out http://www.dictionary.com/cgi-bin/dict.pl?term=iro nic ("poignantly contrary to what was expected") .. I think you meant, on a "coincidental" note :) (Check out their "usage note" for 'ironic' too :).

Sure.. till some one pays your for it. Still freedom of speech? No, it is making money off of someone elses copyrighted works.

The act of talking about circumventing copyright profits no-one and threatens the profits of no-one. I think that is pretty obvious.

You do have a civil liberty protected god given right to commit a crime.

The idiocy of this is just appalling. Please make this the last time you confuse civil liberty and god given right.

Police officers cannot intervene unless a crime is in the act or has already been committed.

Or if they suspect a crime is in progress. Or, more to the point, if they claim such a suspicion. As such, no crime needs to take place for the police to barge in and start harrassing people. You are confusing abilities and rights . You are able to do many things that you don't have the right to do.

What privacy I am giving up that I don't already have or don't have.

For the nth time, by making this kind of abuse more convenient, you are encouraging it's wider and more frequent use. I suppose you think that getting pistol-whipped by one mugger is pretty much the same as getting pistol-whipped by 10. It's already an abuse. Facilitating an increase in the frequency of an abuse does, in fact, make it worse.

Set the crack pipe down son, and step away slowly.

Don't worry, I wouldn't touch your pipe.

. . .come up with at least one (that's all I'm asking for) valid liberty that will be sacrified by using this system.

Liberty from unreasonable search and seizure is certainly one of them. What right does an airline have to know your criminal record? Assuming you were tried, convicted and served your time, they have no business subjecting you to more scrutiny than the next person.

How's that make you feel, that your draconian under-informed assumptions are the same reason why we have to fight the DMCA?

How about you look up draconian, and then re-phrase that?

Sure.. till some one pays your for it. Still freedom of speech? No, it is making money off of someone elses copyrighted works.

The act of talking about circumventing copyright profits no-one and threatens the profits of no-one. I think that is pretty obvious.

You do have a civil liberty protected god given right to commit a crime.

The idiocy of this is just appalling. Please make this the last time you confuse civil liberty and god given right.

Police officers cannot intervene unless a crime is in the act or has already been committed.

Or if they suspect a crime is in progress. Or, more to the point, if they claim such a suspicion. As such, no crime needs to take place for the police to barge in and start harrassing people. You are confusing abilities and rights . You are able to do many things that you don't have the right to do.

What privacy I am giving up that I don't already have or don't have.

For the nth time, by making this kind of abuse more convenient, you are encouraging it's wider and more frequent use. I suppose you think that getting pistol-whipped by one mugger is pretty much the same as getting pistol-whipped by 10. It's already an abuse. Facilitating an increase in the frequency of an abuse does, in fact, make it worse.

Set the crack pipe down son, and step away slowly.

Don't worry, I wouldn't touch your pipe.

. . .come up with at least one (that's all I'm asking for) valid liberty that will be sacrified by using this system.

Liberty from unreasonable search and seizure is certainly one of them. What right does an airline have to know your criminal record? Assuming you were tried, convicted and served your time, they have no business subjecting you to more scrutiny than the next person.

How's that make you feel, that your draconian under-informed assumptions are the same reason why we have to fight the DMCA?

How about you look up draconian, and then re-phrase that?

Sure.. till some one pays your for it. Still freedom of speech? No, it is making money off of someone elses copyrighted works.

The act of talking about circumventing copyright profits no-one and threatens the profits of no-one. I think that is pretty obvious.

You do have a civil liberty protected god given right to commit a crime.

The idiocy of this is just appalling. Please make this the last time you confuse civil liberty and god given right.

Police officers cannot intervene unless a crime is in the act or has already been committed.

Or if they suspect a crime is in progress. Or, more to the point, if they claim such a suspicion. As such, no crime needs to take place for the police to barge in and start harrassing people. You are confusing abilities and rights . You are able to do many things that you don't have the right to do.

What privacy I am giving up that I don't already have or don't have.

For the nth time, by making this kind of abuse more convenient, you are encouraging it's wider and more frequent use. I suppose you think that getting pistol-whipped by one mugger is pretty much the same as getting pistol-whipped by 10. It's already an abuse. Facilitating an increase in the frequency of an abuse does, in fact, make it worse.

Set the crack pipe down son, and step away slowly.

Don't worry, I wouldn't touch your pipe.

. . .come up with at least one (that's all I'm asking for) valid liberty that will be sacrified by using this system.

Liberty from unreasonable search and seizure is certainly one of them. What right does an airline have to know your criminal record? Assuming you were tried, convicted and served your time, they have no business subjecting you to more scrutiny than the next person.

How's that make you feel, that your draconian under-informed assumptions are the same reason why we have to fight the DMCA?

How about you look up draconian, and then re-phrase that?

Sure.. till some one pays your for it. Still freedom of speech? No, it is making money off of someone elses copyrighted works.

The act of talking about circumventing copyright profits no-one and threatens the profits of no-one. I think that is pretty obvious.

You do have a civil liberty protected god given right to commit a crime.

The idiocy of this is just appalling. Please make this the last time you confuse civil liberty and god given right.

Police officers cannot intervene unless a crime is in the act or has already been committed.

Or if they suspect a crime is in progress. Or, more to the point, if they claim such a suspicion. As such, no crime needs to take place for the police to barge in and start harrassing people. You are confusing abilities and rights . You are able to do many things that you don't have the right to do.

What privacy I am giving up that I don't already have or don't have.

For the nth time, by making this kind of abuse more convenient, you are encouraging it's wider and more frequent use. I suppose you think that getting pistol-whipped by one mugger is pretty much the same as getting pistol-whipped by 10. It's already an abuse. Facilitating an increase in the frequency of an abuse does, in fact, make it worse.

Set the crack pipe down son, and step away slowly.

Don't worry, I wouldn't touch your pipe.

. . .come up with at least one (that's all I'm asking for) valid liberty that will be sacrified by using this system.

Liberty from unreasonable search and seizure is certainly one of them. What right does an airline have to know your criminal record? Assuming you were tried, convicted and served your time, they have no business subjecting you to more scrutiny than the next person.

How's that make you feel, that your draconian under-informed assumptions are the same reason why we have to fight the DMCA?

How about you look up draconian, and then re-phrase that?

On the ironic note, today's Dictionary.com word of the day is Serendipity : The faculty or phenomenon of making fortunate accidental discoveries

On the ironic note, today's Dictionary.com word of the day is Serendipity : The faculty or phenomenon of making fortunate accidental discoveries

On the ironic note, today's Dictionary.com word of the day is Serendipity : The faculty or phenomenon of making fortunate accidental discoveries

It's not ironic. It's contradictory, but that isn't irony.

irony
ironic

Irony would be if the open-source crowd had a security-through-obscurity model and Microsoft published exploit code.

It's not ironic. It's contradictory, but that isn't irony.

irony
ironic

Irony would be if the open-source crowd had a security-through-obscurity model and Microsoft published exploit code.

Tingler- Dictionary-carrying English speaker. I have no tolerance for poor spelling.

For some reason when I first skimmed over the article, I accidentally thought the cat's name was Necro, missing the first "o". Which then led me to think of the term necrophilia , which really grossed me out. Not unlike a cat does with it's coughing up fur balls (do they have a subroutine for that?).

I may not be a Japanese inventor, but I don't think i'd want my invention's name to not remind anyone about sex with the dead. Anyone else have this reaction?

It's sarcasm, you idiot.

Why would anyone want a lisp? I mean, it only provides others the opportunity to make fun of you for your defect. Why would anyone want that?

Course, if you also realize that 'gonzo' also is a method of filming low-budget porno, this book takes on a whole new meaning.

"Gonzo" is not a method of filming porn. It has no meaning specific to porn. It is just an adjective roughly equivalent to "outrageous" (gonzo).

heh, np dewd, but while we are wasting time maybe you should check out these links here and here or invest in a spell checker or a GED or something.

heh, np dewd, but while we are wasting time maybe you should check out these links here and here or invest in a spell checker or a GED or something.

It's Dire Straits, not straights. Dire Straits is an expression meaning extreme state of distress. Dire straights doesn't mean anything.