Domain: m-w.com
Stories and comments across the archive that link to m-w.com.
Comments · 2,532
-
Pure speculation
DES MOINES, Iowa (Dow Jones)--McDonald's Corp. (NYSE:MCD - News) characterized a published report that it plans a massive digital song giveaway promotion as "pure speculation."
It's "pure speculation". Notice they didn't say anything against/for it. Speculation is a very neutral term. Merriam Webster says:
Speculation: an act or instance of speculating
And speculating means: to meditate on or ponder a subject
McD is still WORKING ON IT! Doesn't mean they've decided one way or another, it's just that they're thinking about IT! Before /. issues a retraction, try RTFD (Reading the F**king Dictionary). Can we set up some kind of dictionary fund for /. editors? Like this or this? -
Pure speculation
DES MOINES, Iowa (Dow Jones)--McDonald's Corp. (NYSE:MCD - News) characterized a published report that it plans a massive digital song giveaway promotion as "pure speculation."
It's "pure speculation". Notice they didn't say anything against/for it. Speculation is a very neutral term. Merriam Webster says:
Speculation: an act or instance of speculating
And speculating means: to meditate on or ponder a subject
McD is still WORKING ON IT! Doesn't mean they've decided one way or another, it's just that they're thinking about IT! Before /. issues a retraction, try RTFD (Reading the F**king Dictionary). Can we set up some kind of dictionary fund for /. editors? Like this or this? -
Re:Netcraft confirms it!Merriam-Webster Dictionary lists both pronunciations of nuclear as correct. Where are you getting your information from? Or are you just assuming you are correct? Typical slasdot reader...
Main Entry: nuclear Pronunciation: 'nu-klE-&r, 'nyu-,
/-ky&-l&r Function: adjective Date: 1846 1 : of, relating to, or constituting a nucleus 2 a : of or relating to the atomic nucleus b : used in or produced by a nuclear reaction (as fission) c (1) : being a weapon whose destructive power derives from an uncontrolled nuclear reaction (2) : of, produced by, or involving nuclear weapons (3) : armed with nuclear weapons d : of, relating to, or powered by nuclear energy usage Though disapproved of by many, pronunciations ending in \-ky&-l&r\ have been found in widespread use among educated speakers including scientists, lawyers, professors, congressmen, U.S. cabinet members, and at least one U.S. president and one vice president. While most common in the U.S., these pronunciations have also been heard from British and Canadian speakers. -
CGI Pornstars...mmmmmm
Nothing like a digitally altered portrayal of the poifect woman, and best of all should this flop out they may be able to try to pitch a digital art gallery!
Forget Vogue ladies, THIS is how we want you to look!
-1 Overrated (Too many big words for me to comprehend)
-
Re:He spoke in amphibolies
Have not seen movie yet, and I know this is nitpicking, but--
You mean "amphibologies", right? -
Re:Quick to judge
Our machine is in a server park. Of course spammers operate from such places. The SPEWS argument that you block thousands of innocent users to get at one guilty one is just plain immoral,
SPEWS blocks the ISP, not the clients. There's a word you might want to look up in the dictionary -
Dypstopian?Main Entry: dystopia
Pronunciation: (")dis-'tO-pE-&
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from dys- + -topia (as in utopia)
Date: circa 1950
1 : an imaginary place where people lead dehumanized and often fearful lives
(from www.m-w.com)Imaginary place? You haven't been living in Patriot Act America for the last for years, have you partner? We have U.S. citizens held on U.S. soil without charges and access to lawyers all on the say-so of the Selected President* declaring them enemy combatants. We have hundreds of foreign nationals detained on a off-shore base for an undefined period of time, declaring them to not be prisoners of war so that they receive none of the protections of the Geneva Convention. And we have the Ashcroft "Justice" Department figuring out new ways of taking the measures of the Patriot Act and applying them to non-terrorist prosecutions.
-
Re:Moby's is the best...Paraphrasing the DSM-IV, addiction is
...Nice rant, but it all relies on semantics and is a straw-man argument. You've taken a single definition of "addiction" and used it to discredit a lot of things that use a different definition.
From Merriam-Webster, addiction is defined as a "compulsive need for and use of a habit-forming substance (as heroin, nicotine, or alcohol) characterized by tolerance and by well-defined physiological symptoms upon withdrawal". It specifically mentions drugs with "chemical dependency" and directly refers to withdrawal.
So your arguments are pointless. The TRUTH commercials are not full of shit, they are using "addiction" to mean the same as "chemical dependency", which is a common usage. At worst, they are inaccurate with their terminology, but it's the same context as the general public would understand.
-
Re:html coders can still use it...
From Merriam-Webster: "3 a : a system of signals or symbols for communication"
A code is a way to transmit information. Just because HTML is a code which describes meta-data about how the information in a document should be displayed does not render its language any less a code. Calling someone who writes HTML a coder is perfectly apropos; they use a code (HTML) to tell someone (web browsing client software) what something means (Wherever you see "<B> or <b>", make the text 'bold', whatever that means for your client). -
confusion between capitalism & free market
Merriam Webster's definition of capitalism.
capitalism: an economic system characterized by private or corporate ownership of capital goods, by investments that are determined by private decision, and by prices, production, and the distribution of goods that are determined mainly by competition in a free market.
The use of "anti-capitalist" in my post wasn't meant to refer to the so-called capitalism we know is practiced in modern-day America. There are other capitalist models around the world that fit the traditional definition of capitalism a lot better than the U.S.'s. -
Re:Eric Raymond does not own the Jargon File
Of course he refutes it. He's been lying about it ever since he did it. He's certainly not going to change his story now that he makes his fortune partially on the PR value of having put the Jargon File in bookstores with his name on it.
Sure. I see your point. But I personally don't have enough information to confirm or refute it. I'll dig around later out of curiosity. I respectfully acknowledge your point and defer my own judgment. And I would recommend others to do their own research.
And his behavior is worse than SCO's, as he appropriated public property and defrauded a trusting community, while SCO owns what SCO bought and SCO deserves to be compensated for those who stole it from them.
On these points, I would have to disagree. ESR certainly did not appropriate public property. He used information that is in the public domain - as can any body else. And he did not remove or otherwise restrict that information. In fact, he's added to the public domain work and has continued to make that work available to the public.
ESR may or may not have defrauded a trusting community - depending on what exactly happened and what was promised when talk of publishing this work came up. If a promise was made to induce participation from the community and then reneged, then I would agree with this point. But as I've already stated - I acknowledge the issue but reserve comment.
I most strongly disagree with your statement on SCO's behavior. Catagorizing SCO's case as defending their property and seeking compensation for theft is, at best, an extremely breif summery. I would call that description more along the lines of uninformed if not deliberately misleading.
This could quickly turn in to a rehashing of all SCO legal issue discussions. I'll spare both of us the time other than pointing out that SCO's attacks on the GPL, claims that GPL code is in the public domain, apparently broad interpretation of derivative work, and proof of "stolen" code that actually comes from the public domain are just a few of the issues that seem to expand the entire SCO issue beyond that of simple defense of intellectual property. Such as it may be. -
Re:One word...GATOR
>Assuming that by referencing "Hell", you are believing the tenants of a religion that has such a concept
If he's atheist (like many here), you assume wrong. You'll need to use the dictionary definition:
2 a : a place or state of misery, torment, or wickedness (source: Merriam Webster)
Which seems to fit perfectly fine.
Yes, IHBT. Oh well. -
Re:That's a goal?I'm on a crusade. I intend to post a comment like this one whenever I see anybody use "virii." Please don't interpret this comment as either endorsement of or disagreement with the parent post. Moderators: with your help, we can wipe out "virii" in our lifetime!
The plural of "virus" isn't "virii." There is no such word. The plural of "virus" is "viruses."
Here's a good explanation from cdknow.com, quoted here in its entirety because the people who most need to read this won't click on a link.
The correct English plural of virus is viruses. Please consult any good dictionary before making up words.
For the purists, in Latin, there is a rarely-used plural form:
virus, viri (neuter)
(Forms: almost always restricted to nominative and accusative singular; generally singular in Lucretius, ablative singular in Lucretius)
The point of this is that even in Latin the form "viri" is rarely used. The singular form is used in most every instance. (This is from the Oxford Latin Dictionary.)
So, when considering the Latin: "virii" is incorrect and "viri" was almost never used.
Despite the fact there was little use for the plural form, there is another reason why "viri" was rarely used. The most common Latin word for "man" is "vir" with "viri" being its plural in the form used as the subject of a sentence. Thus, since "men" as the subject of a sentence would be used far more often than "venoms" (virus means venom) the "viri" word was most commonly seen as the plural of "man."
Bottom line: Don't try to make up words using a false Latin plural form. Since the word virus in its English form is now used then the English plural (viruses) should be used.
More plural-of-virus resources:
perl.com, the canonical and exhaustive source
Jonathan de Boyne Pollard's Frequently Given Answer
Merriam-Webster's "Word for the Wise," January 20, 2000. -
Re:Macs are great for many reasons - so are pc'sI'm on a crusade. I intend to post a comment like this one whenever I see anybody use "virii." (You're getting it, too, Gene, because you were dumb enough to say "viri," which while less wrong than "virii" is still wrong, wrong, wrong.) Please don't interpret this comment as either endorsement of or disagreement with the parent post. Moderators: with your help, we can wipe out "virii" in our lifetime!
The plural of "virus" isn't "virii." There is no such word. The plural of "virus" is "viruses."
Here's a good explanation from cdknow.com, quoted here in its entirety because the people who most need to read this won't click on a link.
The correct English plural of virus is viruses. Please consult any good dictionary before making up words.
For the purists, in Latin, there is a rarely-used plural form:
virus, viri (neuter)
(Forms: almost always restricted to nominative and accusative singular; generally singular in Lucretius, ablative singular in Lucretius)
The point of this is that even in Latin the form "viri" is rarely used. The singular form is used in most every instance. (This is from the Oxford Latin Dictionary.)
So, when considering the Latin: "virii" is incorrect and "viri" was almost never used.
Despite the fact there was little use for the plural form, there is another reason why "viri" was rarely used. The most common Latin word for "man" is "vir" with "viri" being its plural in the form used as the subject of a sentence. Thus, since "men" as the subject of a sentence would be used far more often than "venoms" (virus means venom) the "viri" word was most commonly seen as the plural of "man."
Bottom line: Don't try to make up words using a false Latin plural form. Since the word virus in its English form is now used then the English plural (viruses) should be used.
More plural-of-virus resources:
perl.com, the canonical and exhaustive source
The alt.comp.virus FAQ
Jonathan de Boyne Pollard's Frequently Given Answer
Merriam-Webster's "Word for the Wise," January 20, 2000. -
Re:Gator harmful to our site
Perhaps it is a SLAPP suit, but I think there's a better word for it:
barratry
3: the persistent incitement of litigation
SEE ALSO: MPAA, RIAA, Metallica -
Re:NAT is the answerI'm on a crusade. I intend to post a comment like this one whenever I see anybody use "virii." Please don't interpret this comment as either endorsement of or disagreement with the parent post. Moderators: with your help, we can wipe out "virii" in our lifetime!
The plural of "virus" isn't "virii." There is no such word. The plural of "virus" is "viruses."
Here's a good explanation from cdknow.com, quoted here in its entirety because the people who most need to read this won't click on a link.
The correct English plural of virus is viruses. Please consult any good dictionary before making up words.
For the purists, in Latin, there is a rarely-used plural form:
virus, viri (neuter)
(Forms: almost always restricted to nominative and accusative singular; generally singular in Lucretius, ablative singular in Lucretius)
The point of this is that even in Latin the form "viri" is rarely used. The singular form is used in most every instance. (This is from the Oxford Latin Dictionary.)
So, when considering the Latin: "virii" is incorrect and "viri" was almost never used.
Despite the fact there was little use for the plural form, there is another reason why "viri" was rarely used. The most common Latin word for "man" is "vir" with "viri" being its plural in the form used as the subject of a sentence. Thus, since "men" as the subject of a sentence would be used far more often than "venoms" (virus means venom) the "viri" word was most commonly seen as the plural of "man."
Bottom line: Don't try to make up words using a false Latin plural form. Since the word virus in its English form is now used then the English plural (viruses) should be used.
More plural-of-virus resources:
perl.com, the canonical and exhaustive source
Jonathan de Boyne Pollard's Frequently Given Answer
Merriam-Webster's "Word for the Wise," January 20, 2000. -
Re:Not just the books
Dammit man, whatever happened to Mad Dogs and Englishmen.
With Britons complaining about miniscule temperature variations, it's no wonder the Empire has gone to hell.
-
What does "broadcast" Mean?
There seems to be something absurd about wanting to block copying of broadcasted material (from m-w.com):
Main Entry: broadcast
Pronunciation: 'brod-"kast
Function: adjective
Date: 1767
1 : cast or scattered in all directions
2 : made public by means of radio or television
3 : of or relating to radio or television broadcastingCopying broadcast materials only allows wider distribution. But, I guess CBS wants the right to make us pay attention to commercials.
-
Re:Literally ran for their lives...This may just be a pet peeve of mine
I was quite literally amazed to learn of your pet peeve.
Releax dude literally does mean virtually/actually also. Or I was actually amazed, or I was virtually amazed. Hmm sounds about the same to me.
-
Re:Keep putting it off. Please !
actually at Merriam-Webster
-
Re:Uh...
1
: a pretense of ignorance and of willingness to learn from another assumed in order to make the other's false conceptions conspicuous by adroit questioning -- called also Socratic irony
2 a : the use of words to express something other than and especially the opposite of the literal meaning b : a usually humorous or sardonic literary style or form characterized by irony c : an ironic expression or utterance
3 a (1) : incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result (2) : an event or result marked by such incongruity b : incongruity between a situation developed in a drama and the accompanying words or actions that is understood by the audience but not by the characters in the play -- called also dramatic irony, tragic ironySo, technically, the part where the plane is crashing, and the man says Well, isn't this nice is irony. However, as far as I can tell, that is the only ironic statement in the entire song.
I've been debating the definition of irony for the last couple of weeks. It's one of the most incorrectly used English words, and one of the ones that annoys me the most.
It is not the same thing as bad luck, happenstance or coincidence.
-
Re:A prof's trials with Linux
Umm... your examples don't correspond to the
.sig, since radii is actually the plural of radius (check this link if you don't believe me) -
Technical Evil and Microsoft
Most of the fanboys seem to think that dislike of windows for technical reasons is evidence that MS is evil, and that the fact that Windows is ahead in the "desktop war" means that Windows is terrible. No wonder so many people don't take you guys seriously, if you don't understand that those connections aren't logical.
What do me mean by "evil"?
Evil
1 a : morally reprehensible : SINFUL, WICKED b : arising from actual or imputed bad character or conduct
2 a archaic : INFERIOR b : causing discomfort or repulsion : OFFENSIVE c : DISAGREEABLE
3 a : causing harm : PERNICIOUS b : marked by misfortune : UNLUCKY
Evil is one of those interesting english words that have numerous meanings and connotations... yet induces a generally universal emotional reaction. When critics describe Microsoft as "evil", they are certainly implying negative behavior. But why?
Microsoft's critics point to a laundry list of negative behavior. But I'll focus on one of the lesser-explored evils... since "technical reasons" was brought up.
Techies have a somewhat simplistic view of technology. Things are Good when they work. They are Bad when they don't. When things fail to work, not only are they Bad... but very likely they are also broken. And the average techie / hacker will feel compelled to fix things by making them functional.
Each individual's concept of functional may be slightly different. Something may perform exactly as designed but still be found broken due to discovery of better methods or a desire to make an item do something beyond what it was originally envisioned.
Quite often, this involves inter-operability between systems - be they devices, software, etc. Bad systems are often hard to interconnect since there was no thought about interfacing them beyond themselves or with non-standard systems. This can present quite a challenge to the individual trying to fix the system in question.
It might be worth noting that sometimes a bad piece of technology is simply buggy. Something may be fully intended to interface with something else but fail to do so because of a failure or mistake. Although it is just as common that bad technology exists because of bad design.
The point where something goes from being simply bad to being evil has to do with intent. A system may be bad because it is faulty or not very well designed. It is evil once it is discovered that the system has been designed not to work in the desired manner. This is more than simply a lack of functionality. The focus is on the intent to make something not work; that this lack of functionality is as much a part of the design as what the system in question does.
When Microsoft is labeled as Evil on technical merits, it is this behavior being criticized. Microsoft has a history of making systems that are incompatible with other technology. Their strategy more recently has been to work with supporting open standards, but coining the "embrace and extend" strategy to make other systems using these standards incompatible. In any case, Microsoft's products are often designed to fail to function with other systems unless they too are from Microsoft. It is this kind of "lock-in" behavior that is distained by techies and worthy of the Evil tittle.
Granted - this may seem a little esoteric to the non-techie. But then, the average non-techie is not maintaining the architecture they take for granted today or designing the systems they will become dependant on, but continue to take for granted, tommorow. -
Re:We did this in the US almost 50 years ago...
Don't you mean, "numbnuts, eh?"
it was a joke. -
Re:Google client makes system slow?
>Even mozilla becomes slow.
What do you mean, even Mozilla? From m-w:
Main Entry: slowasallhell
Pronounciation: sla:h'heall
Function: adverb
Etymology: English, spoofed from Japanese.
Date: 21st century
1 : Mozilla -
Re:Apple had nothing to do with it.Except it wasn't a PC. It was a non-PC microcomputer. Apple has yet to make PC's.
From M-W.com's:
One entry found for personal computer.
Main Entry: personal computer
Function: noun
Date: 1977
: a general-purpose computer equipped with a microprocessor and designed to run especially commercial software (as a word processor or World Wide Web browser) for an individual userMacs seem to be "general purpose", have a microprocessor, and designed to run especially commerical software. Word, Photoshop, iTunes, etc.
So acording to the dictionary definition, Apple computers qualify as "PC's".
-
Use a dictionary
Look up hypocrite
YAW. HTH. HAND. -
Re:Try this one...
AC, Why yes indeed it does mean recurrent. But it also means long duration or always present.
I provide this reply as a service just so you don't have to live life misled on this point.
Try looking it up: Mirriam-Webster or dictionary.com
As some wise person once said, "Don't taunt the "happy fun ball." -
Re:suck it!
In recent decades the definition of what is considered music has evolved quite significantly. The current Merriam-Webster dictionary defines music as:
a : the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity b : vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony
Therefore, rap is msuic - despite what many traditionalists would like to think. What is apparent, however, is that the sound of an executable file is not music; it is noise. -
Re:Help
-
Re:Gotta love Astro/Quantum physics
Hmm. Like the low entrophy value of a pulsar maybe?
You may find this enlightening. -
Dictionary-less
Yes, definitely. I just started college, and my roommate brought a dictionary with him. I stopped and realized that I'd never even considered bringing a dictionary or thesaurus with me because I've got M-W.com and even a second opinion with Dictionary.com, and then some non-words that should be at PseudoDictionary.com. It simply never occurred to me to bring a hard copy of a dictionary, because I've grown so dependent on those websites.
As far as encyclopedias go, Google has basically redefined the concept of an encyclopedia for me. With a little query-practice one can find a huge number of resources for just about anything imaginable. Google's almost like an encyclopedia to a library of encyclopedias.
Later,
Patrick -
Re:It may be non evil...A lot of music now days very barely falls into the definition of music.
And just how do you define what is music and what isn't? Going by the dictionary definition, music is:a : the science or art of ordering tones or sounds in succession, in combination, and in temporal relationships to produce a composition having unity and continuity b : vocal, instrumental, or mechanical sounds having rhythm, melody, or harmony.
Which encompasses everything anybody ever called music, and quite a bit more. What you're really saying is that a lot of music now days barely falls into your definition of music, which is hardly an objective statement.
Indie music, on the whole, DOES suck because the people either lack talent, lack recording skills, they lack the funds to get proper equipment, or maybe they just really really universally bad taste. Whatever their excuse may be...
Conversely, I would say commercial music sucks because labels favor image over talent, are afraid to take risks and have really really universally bad taste. Fundamentally, the majors are in the business of music to sell records, and will release anything that they think will make money; sucking or not doesn't enter into the equation. There are certain styles of music that are only available from indie labels, or where the quality of what comes from indies is considered superior to the majors; it depends on what you're into.
Some people will jump in here now to defend new and interesting sounds, or things that "break the rules" because it's cool or interesting, but most of the time it really isn't either.
This is purely a question of taste; I listen to a lot of music featuring "new and interesting sounds" that I enjoy immensely, and which other people (say, my parents) wouldn't even consider music. I do agree that experimentation for experimentation's sake can lead to pretty ugly results, but it doesn't mean that experimentation is in itself a bad thing; quite the opposite, it is vital to the continuing evolution of music.
He then pointed out to me that those songs that "make sense" stand the test of time.
But some of those things that "make sense" now didn't neccessarily make sense when they were created, or when you first heard them. Some of the most enduring classical music was actually quite unpopular at the time it was written, and much of the best music of the last couple of decades was a departure from the norm at the time. Personally, many of my all time favorite albums are the ones that grew on me.
Back to the topic -- This Shareware Music thing hasn't any more or less potential to create good music than the current Music Business. It just has more of a chance of exposing us to the stuff that REALLY SUCKS (irrelevent of tates).
This is true to a certain extent, but only of the companies like mp3.com, where anybody can upload their latest song, even if it was a demo that came with the software they pirated off the web (this does happen!). In the long run, the succesful ventures (i.e. the ones that will make money) are going to be the ones that have a clear musical vision, and good quality control. These are the ones whose releases you will take a chance listening to even if you've never heard of the artist before, because the label has proven itself to you as a source of good music. These are the ones who will get the best marketing money can't buy, as you tell all your friends about them.
Finally, since the barrier to entry is much lower, I think the shareware music concept has a much better chance of exposing people to good, innovative, music that will stand the test of time than the current music business. -
Re:Lies
-
Re:Their own dumbass fault
Please see the definition of friggin' (frigging).
I truly hope that it wasnt a downright battle of friggin' wits.
I do not think that word means what you think it means. You know, I really think it is sad that so many slashdotters use reference.com as a dictionary when a real dictionary is available. Reference.com has never produced a decent definition of a word as far as I can tell, and seems to have less authority than any other random wiki.
Merriam Webster has the following for "frigging":
Main Entry: frig
Pronunciation: 'frig
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Form(s): frigged; frigging
Etymology: Middle English fryggen to wriggle
Date: 1598
usually vulgar : COPULATE -- sometimes used in the present participle as a meaningless intensive
In other words, it is a less vulgar form of "fucking" and is used in all the same senses of that word, though I would personally say it is rarely used in the literal sense. (Such as "Tom fucked Shirley." You never hear "Tom frigged Shirley." ) Masturbation? Whatever.
-
Re:Quicktime
why don't you look it up?
RUN COWARD! I HUNGER! -
Re:He wrote it as if it was on @Stake's behalf
-
Re:He wrote it as if it was on @Stake's behalf
-
Re:He wrote it as if it was on @Stake's behalf
-
Re:DemocracyThat's why it's a Constitutional Republic and not a Democracy. Don't they teach anything in schools anymore?
Yes they do.
According to Merriam-Webster:
democracy: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.I'm sick of people whining "We live in a republic, not a democracy." Our government is a mixture of both dammit. If we lived in a pure democracy, then we wouldn't have a federal congress or state & local assemblies representing us; we would all cast individual votes on all issues. If we lived in a pure republic, we would never vote directly for any measures or propositions; our elected representatives would do all the voting for us.
-
Re:SPEWS RIP?
By taking the ISP's cutomers hostages
.... in real life taking hostages is a crime, and should be so in cyberspace as well !
So, if I boycott somebody, I should buy from them? -
"Affine"?
From the article:
Processors should affine to one CPU and will not bounce between CPUs.
Affine is not a verb! -
Re:how oddit's amazing what you can find out in 15 seconds... taken directly from the dictionary.
Main Entry: irregardless
fuckin a, it's as if people can't take a minute of their time to research something and keep themselves from looking like a fool, making claims that imply "i know what i'm talking about" but show exactly the contrary. we have the biggest resource in the world here guys, and we all claim to know how to use it, so let's use it.
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'grd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. -
Re:how oddit's amazing what you can find out in 15 seconds... taken directly from the dictionary.
Main Entry: irregardless
fuckin a, it's as if people can't take a minute of their time to research something and keep themselves from looking like a fool, making claims that imply "i know what i'm talking about" but show exactly the contrary. we have the biggest resource in the world here guys, and we all claim to know how to use it, so let's use it.
Pronunciation: "ir-i-'grd-l&s
Function: adverb
Etymology: probably blend of irrespective and regardless
Date: circa 1912
nonstandard : REGARDLESS
usage Irregardless originated in dialectal American speech in the early 20th century. Its fairly widespread use in speech called it to the attention of usage commentators as early as 1927. The most frequently repeated remark about it is that "there is no such word." There is such a word, however. It is still used primarily in speech, although it can be found from time to time in edited prose. Its reputation has not risen over the years, and it is still a long way from general acceptance. Use regardless instead. -
Re:You know
According to the Merriam-Webster OnLine Dictionary we discover:
dynamic : 2 a : marked by usually continuous and productive activity or change (a dynamic city)
operating: 4 : to follow a course of conduct that is often irregular (crooked gamblers operating in the club)
company : 2 a : a group of persons or things (a company of horsemen)
So, they are a bunch of crooks that continually attack others. That wasn't so hard now, was it? -
Re:spamhaus rebutts this claim
-
This isn't about "claims". It's about FACTS.
I love how the overly-cautious Reuters reporters, used to avoiding libel claims by saying "x CLAIMS y", or "ACCORDING TO x, y", say things like "ACCORDING TO THE LAWSUIT this", or "the lawsuit CLAIMS that". This is a simple matter of FACTS! One kilobytes is 1,024 bytes. One megabyte is 1,024 kilobytes. One gigabyte is 1,024 megabytes.
I wish the reporters who wrote this story would look the word 'gigabyte' up in the dictionary.
Saying moronic things about how it's being "claimed" that a gigabyte isn't 1,000,000,000 bytes is like... well, it's like if a car's maximum speed is really 60mph, but the car manufacturer considers 3960 feet to be "a mile", so they advertise the maximum speed as 80mph... -
Re:That's what...
used derisively to indicate that something just stated is all too obvious or self-evident
characterized by or containing an excess; specifically : using more words than necessary
I like the "derisively" part of "duh" better.
;-) -
Re:That's what...
used derisively to indicate that something just stated is all too obvious or self-evident
characterized by or containing an excess; specifically : using more words than necessary
I like the "derisively" part of "duh" better.
;-) -
Re:Not MOSTLY from Microsoft and Sun...According to the definition:
1 a : marked by ease and informality : NONCHALANT b : showing little forethought or preparation : OFFHAND <glib answers> c : lacking depth and substance : SUPERFICIAL <glib solutions to knotty problems>
Of course, I could spell "response" better. I could have also avoided the whole "10K" thing. Guess that preview button has a purpose after all.