Slashdot Mirror

It's good to see that not everyone in the world is heartless. For example, take this AC. I'm not exactly sure what this is called, but I love seeing people pick apart other's posts and then replying to individual pieces. So, naturally, I find it my duty to do the same...

Asking the moderators to aggressively down-mod this thread just so it palatable to your own sensitive intellect is just a little selfish (not to mention arrogant).

Arrogant? If she were being arrogant, her sentence would have perhaps been "You should moderate these down because I say so."

But cute is not the same thing as funny, and many of the posts here are hilarious.

Hi, you should also note that many of the posts here are incredibly stupid (i.e, the both of ours!)

They were SPAMMERS so 'human' is a debatable term.

Gee, I wasn't aware that "anonymous coward" was now synonymous with God.

It's not as though human life (or spammer life for that matter) is exactly a scarce commodity.

Hello, do you know the definition of the words you are typing? Quoting M-W Dictionary - lookup "Commodity": 1 : an economic good: as a : a product of agriculture or mining. Well now, since when is a human life an economic good?

I think it could go "An Overly Sensitive Thought Police On Slashdot is just a Heartless Uncaring Bastard who hasn't spent all night sorting and cleaning spam out of a mail spool yet.

That's pretty good. Think of it all by yourself?

Some might consider this flamebait (not sure why) but I would just like to inform them that this is sarcasm at it's finest!@#$

The word is "fascist", for those who want to see what he means.

Translation can be found either via dict or at Mirriam Webster On-Line.

HTH

Following this link will take you to the online version of Webster's dictionary.

Might I suggest "humor" as one of the first words you look up?

It's called humor, Look it up.

..you're wasting my time. Why don't you go see what Merriam-Webster has to say? Actually, I'll save you the 2 - 10 second search:

usable on many computers without modification *portable software*

You'll note the subjectiveness of the word "many". I could consider anything greater-than or equal to 1 to be "many", although for the purpose of this definition, I'd be considered rather stupid for equating "many" with "1" (as I probably would be in general, anyway), but certainly there is little room for debate that any number greater-than one could be considered to be "many" (remember, this is subjective, not objective).

Okay, let's get some idea of what you mean by "portable" then. To a lot of people (I suspect), portable means "write once, compile and run anywhere" - and that's the goal of using ANSI C wherever possible, I would imagine.

Well, I guess "a lot of people" would be, um, dead wrong .. The definition clearly states "many" not "all". Big difference, a la what I already said:

You should also note a distinct difference between the usage of the terms "portable", "extremely portable", and "100% portable". C is "extremely portable", not "100% portable".

Hopefully you can figure out what that sentence means at this point, because I'm not going to bother explaining it further.

That's what Java does particularly well (in terms of language - the implementation of applet viewers is another matter, of course). That's using "portable" in the sense of "mobile" (a portable object being one that can be moved around at will).

What does Merriam have to say about this?

capable of being carried or moved about *a portable TV*

So basically you're trying to tell me that Java is a physical manifestation that I can move about as will, sort of like a book on Java? Umm..?

What do you mean by portable? Do you mean you can change the code to make it run on another box (ie it's "able" to be "ported")?

I mean it the way the dictionary defines it, perhaps? Unlike some people, I don't attempt to refute the true definition of a word at every turn. Are you somehow trying to argue that you can't write portable C code? Sure, you can make modifications to make it even more portable, but that doesn't mean that it wasn't portable in the first place. The preprocessor is your friend.

As I've said before, C is good for portability when you want to do mostly processing, but when you start doing a lot of IO (particularly network and/or user IO) it loses out.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I'm still not interested, and repeating yourself ad nauseam isn't likely to change my mind, but rather to cause me to begin simply ignoring you. That said, this is not an RFC. Don't expect further responses.

:-)
-
<SIG>
"I am not trying to prove that I am right... I am only trying to find out whether." -Bertolt Brecht

A lot of people have trouble understanding that beta-tests are distribution. But when you transfer a copyrighted work between two different legal entities, that's distribution.

Using the word "but" in and of itself would seem to indicate to me that the current sentence was an exception to the preceding one.. which would mean that you would have meant to say that "people have trouble understanding that beta-tests are [not] distribution", and I rather doubt that, given the context..

Context is everything. Bruce used a very common English construction which I had no trouble understanding. The word "but" does not always mean an exception...

If you have something intelligent to say, you'll log in or get moderated up so I can read it. Otherwise, you're wasting your time.

Because so much vital information is now stored in the networks of this world's computers, we would be silly or naive to consider attacks against these networks as something other than terrorism when such attacks are made by an organized movement with non-monetary motives (then its just plain criminal). Consider the ramifications of cracking the NYSE computers (economic ruin?)... Or perhaps networks associated with power utilities (chaos?).

The claim has been made that "cyberterrorism" is non-violent, but is that true? Although Webster's says violence is "an exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse." Nothing on the internet is physical, so I think we have to consider the general intent of this word instead. In the cyber realm, I propose "violence" can only mean "an act intended to injure or abuse."

Perhaps I'm making an unnecessarily big deal about this, but terror can occur in many forms in a world which has so many levels to it. Fear is all that is necessary.

What's worse is the dictionary doesn't use either of the definitions we have for hacker. A hacker is someone who either makes furniture with an axe, or just is plain not good at something.

I suppose it depends on the dictionary: http://www.m-w.com/ gives both of these definitions among others.

Main Entry: atheist
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist
Function: noun
Date: 1571
: one who denies the existence of God

Main Entry: agnostic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

I suppose that one could argue with Merriam-Websters, but why? Maybe you should go argue with the ancient greeks about what they meant, too.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast...

Main Entry: atheist
Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist
Function: noun
Date: 1571
: one who denies the existence of God

Main Entry: agnostic
Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g-
Function: noun
Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW
Date: 1869
: a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

I suppose that one could argue with Merriam-Websters, but why? Maybe you should go argue with the ancient greeks about what they meant, too.

--
A host is a host from coast to coast...

Actually, I think the "randomtext" part is already happening. Coca-Cola used http://www.iydkydg.com/ for its "Coke Card" promotion this summer. What the hell is an "iydkydg" supposed to be? (I checked -- "iydkydg" isn't in Merriam-Webster.)

Of course, all loyal kibologists know that Kibo's HappyNet will include all newsgroup names from "*.aaaaa.aaaaa.aaaaa.aaaaa to *.zzzzz.zzzzz.zzzzz.zzzzz". We should probably just put Kibo in charge of the Web while we're at it. He makes more sense than any of Al Gore's plans.

we've been trained as kids to do this, why should things change now.

BTW: www.m-w.com bookmark it, memorize it, use it when unsure.

It's "rampant", 'Rampent' sounds like some pagan absolution ritual

On topic opinion: Intel is in business to make money. You figure the rest out.

You're first mistake was to trust a Phychology definition of a scientific term over a Chemistry definition. I first learned about the difference between theory and law in high school chemistry, but sinse this discussion I have verified my above definitions in three different sources. In addition to the web page I cited in my original article, you can go here, or to Webster's Dictionary:

Main Entry: theory
Pronunciation: 'thE-&-rE, 'thi(-&)r-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ries
Etymology: Late Latin theoria, from Greek theOria, from theOrein
Date: 1592
1 : the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another
2 : abstract thought : SPECULATION
3 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art (music theory)
4 a : a belief, policy, or procedure proposed or followed as the basis of action (her method is based on the theory that all children want to learn) b : an ideal or hypothetical set of facts, principles, or circumstances -- often used in the phrase in theory (in theory, we have always advocated freedom for all)
5 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena (wave theory of light)
6 a : a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE c : a body of theorems presenting a concise systematic view of a subject (theory of equations)

Main Entry: law
Pronunciation: 'lo
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English lagu, of Scandinavian origin; akin to Old Norse log law; akin to Old English licgan to lie -- more at LIE
Date: before 12th century
1 a (1) : a binding custom or practice of a community : a rule of conduct or action prescribed or formally recognized as binding or enforced by a controlling authority (2) : the whole body of such customs, practices, or rules (3) : COMMON LAW b (1) : the control brought about by the existence or enforcement of such law (2) : the action of laws considered as a means of redressing wrongs; also : LITIGATION (3) : the agency of or an agent of established law c : a rule or order that it is advisable or obligatory to observe d : something compatible with or enforceable by established law e : CONTROL, AUTHORITY
2 a often capitalized : the revelation of the will of God set forth in the Old Testament b capitalized : the first part of the Jewish scriptures : PENTATEUCH, TORAH
-- see BIBLE table
3 : a rule of construction or procedure (the laws of poetry)
4 : the whole body of laws relating to one subject
5 a : the legal profession b : law as a department of knowledge : JURISPRUDENCE c : legal knowledge
6 a : a statement of an order or relation of phenomena that so far as is known is invariable under the given conditions b : a general relation proved or assumed to hold between mathematical or logical expressions

-

I would argue that certain professions require lesser formal qualifications then others. Of course you might be able to name handfuls of people who've "beaten" the system but overall formal qualifications provide a particular form of guarantee.

Organizations like the IEEE are there to ensure standards within the profession. Note for example the IEEE's code of ethics. Point number one says:

"to accept responsibility in making engineering decisions consistent with the safety, health and welfare of the public, and to disclose promptly factors that might endanger the public or the environment;"

Many people who call themselves "software engineers" are not bounded by such regulations? You may ask why, and the simple reason is that there exist no such organizations for software engineers to protect their formal status.

Even a lowly qualified electrician is required to undertake formal courses and to follow and obey government regulated guidelines and if not is liable to prosecution. Why then are so called software engineers (again I stress those working on mission critical applications) without qualifications allowed a free hold?

I see too many people haphazardly using the term "engineer" without ever thinking about the responsibility. I've heard that in Japan you have to work at least five years in the engineering profession after completing your degree before you can formally call yourself an "engineer" (can anyone in Japan confirm this?).

To soften your dictionary definition, Merriam-Webster also defines "engineer" as: "a person who is trained in or follows as a profession a branch of engineering." But who cares about dictionary definitions. At the end of the day we're talking about responsibility. If you're employing someone wouldn't you feel safer employing a qualified person bounded by regulations such as IEEEs? Or would you employ any cowboy who lists "engineer" as their profession?

Maybe we see things differently outside the US, where education is mostly cheaper (or free) and undergoing a 3-4 year university degree is not as hard on the pocket.

Heck...I even looked up slashdot in the dictionary

Main Entry: Slashdot
Pronunciation: 'slash dot
Function: noun
Etymology: Midwestern American English (Holland, MI)
Date: 1996?
1. News for nerds, stuff that matters
2. Microsoft bashing for enlightened folk
3. To criticize cuttingly
4. to reduce sharply

sistren

Masses of honest people? Most people, when it comes down to it, are selfish. It used to be a survival trait.

My reply was to a response about making decisions for the entire Net community (roughly). Selfishness plays a very important role, in that you vote,pick,choose, how/what you want, so does everyone else, and the majority rules.

Democracy (from www.m-w.com)
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

.....

By true change I was referring to making or destryoing matter/energy at its base level. While topical changes happen all the time, the base nature remains the same.

Rock stars also let you tape to a DAT! Get a
grip.

Let you tape what to a DAT? I think
you've got your facts reversed. The fact is, the
media publishing industry was so scared of DAT
that it tried to prevent its adoption (and was
successful enough that the only people who now use
it are media professionals, rather than the
general public at whom it was meant to be
targeted. The same is true for the minidisc, to a
lesser extent.) In fact, in the past they have
tried to get it declared illegal to use VCRs to
videotape TV shows in your own home for your
own personal use.

As for playing "pirated" games. If you want to
go ahead and download games that are 30-50MB in
size you go ahead do that on single phone line
your whole household uses.

Point the first: There are legitimately
downloadable games, even game demos, that
are as large as or larger than N64 ROMs.

Mario 64 ROM: 8 megs
Legend of Zelda ROM: 30 megs

Half-Life 1.009 patch/Team Fortress Classic: 18 megs
Quake 3 Arena Test: 22 megs
Half-Life Uplink demo: 40 megs

Point the second: Many people have access to
faster methods of downloading than just phone
lines. I, for example, have zip disks and the
campus computer labs. I downloaded the Q3A test
in about 10 minutes. Cable modems and ADSL are
becoming more widely available; within five or ten
years, we may almost all be using them.

(And at any rate, my phone line is solely
my own, so if I stay on the phone all day, nobody
cares but me. The really important people in my
life can reach me by email or ICQ anyway.)

And stop saying piracy. Players are not
guerilla arsonists murdering truck drivers in an
ambush.

And what does that have to do with the
price of tea in China?

Courtesy of the Merriam-Webster
WWWebster Dictionary:

Main Entry: piracy
Pronunciation: 'pI-r&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Medieval Latin piratia, from Late Greek peirateia, from Greek peiratEs pirate
Date: 1537
1 : an act of robbery on the high seas; also : an act resembling such robbery
2 : robbery on the high seas
3 : the unauthorized use of another's production, invention, or conception especially in infringement of a copyright

Please tell me why definition 3 does not apply,
exactly?

The industry is bent on convincing people that
in this world there are game playing couch
potatoes who couldn't tell a good story if their
life depended on it, the companies who entertain
and are the only ones who can make a game by some
divine fortune. Oh yeah and them stinkin, ugly,
murderin criminals, them pirates. Get real!

And what does that have to do with
anything?

The issue isn't that other people don't have the
right to make games. The issue is that they don't
have the right to copy the games that people have
made and distribute them for free, without the
creators getting compensated for it.

And legally and morally, they really don't.

That the moderator system is nothing less than perfect?

That's the incorrect thought that you let creep into your mind. From your post, it appears that you believe there are a set number of moderators that have been hand-picked by the /. folks. In addition, you project that you don't like it because it appears to you that the moderators that were picked do not represent the /. community.

Read the guidelines at Slashdot Moderation It's apparently quite outdated, but you will see that only a few initial moderators were hand-picked. The vast majority of moderators were chosen because of their apparently insightful comments that they posted. A mistake could have been made during the initial selection, thereby having an effect on the overall makeup of the moderators. However, I sincerely doubt that /. chose the original moderators so haphazardly as to cause a significant problem.

I personally don't have a problem with people moderating down comments that are slamming Linux or happen to support Microsoft. I've noticed that the comments that tend to get moderated down have either outright lies in them or appear to be written simply to generate flames. You could most likely show me specific examples where this is not the case, but I believe it is true of the majority.

And why remove the moderation system? That just doesn't make sense. If you want to see all comments you can. No one is censoring anyone else -- in the common use of the word ( "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable"). One definition of censuring is "to find fault with and criticise as blameworthy." I think that is exactly what is happening, people are finding fault with and criticizing as blameworthy posts that are made that they don't agree with. I don't see anything wrong with that (it's called free speach) and think it's a Good Thing(tm). Now, if we were actually censOring, that would be a totally different matter.

I think that is a problem most people have, not knowing the difference between censoring and censuring, and it appears you have the same misunderstanding. If you don't then good, but do you see how your argument falls apart when the moderator system relies on censure and not censorship?

A possible fault may be that they don't get to note why they moderated up or down, because moderators can't participate in discussions they moderate. However, I believe this is a good thing -- you wouldn't want people to moderate their own comments or those of people who comment on their comments. May be that you could not allow moderation after you made your comments. No, one could moderate a comment up that they planned on replying to and then reply to that comment. Well, if we had these restrictions:

1) You can't moderate your own comments.
2) You can't reply to any comments that you have moderated, or any replies to any comments you have moderated.
3) You can't moderate any replies to your comments.

I don't know it's kind of getting a little complicated. I think the best thing is, just live with it. If you find that you don't fit in with this community, relocate and move somewhere else. We won't kick you out and we can't make you stay. You could always use your preferences so that you don't hear news items concerning Microsoft and/or Linux. Or may be you can get into the practice of changing your threshold to -1 every time you go into a "controversial" story? I think that's one of the reasons why it has been so easy to change your threshold, so you can see all comments if you want to.

Yes, you were whining, and it is not appreciated. There has not been any censorship on /. by the moderators. There has been plenty of censuring by moderators because that's what they've been asked to do. The goal in choosing moderators, to my knowledge, was never to pick those who were "open minded" (the definition of how open minded we wanted them to be if that was the goal would change from person to person). It was to have the moderators act as representatives of the /. community in "scoring" comments based upon their totally subjective worth. If that doesn't work for you don't use the threshold feature and keep yours set to -1.

That the moderator system is nothing less than perfect?

That's the incorrect thought that you let creep into your mind. From your post, it appears that you believe there are a set number of moderators that have been hand-picked by the /. folks. In addition, you project that you don't like it because it appears to you that the moderators that were picked do not represent the /. community.

Read the guidelines at Slashdot Moderation It's apparently quite outdated, but you will see that only a few initial moderators were hand-picked. The vast majority of moderators were chosen because of their apparently insightful comments that they posted. A mistake could have been made during the initial selection, thereby having an effect on the overall makeup of the moderators. However, I sincerely doubt that /. chose the original moderators so haphazardly as to cause a significant problem.

I personally don't have a problem with people moderating down comments that are slamming Linux or happen to support Microsoft. I've noticed that the comments that tend to get moderated down have either outright lies in them or appear to be written simply to generate flames. You could most likely show me specific examples where this is not the case, but I believe it is true of the majority.

And why remove the moderation system? That just doesn't make sense. If you want to see all comments you can. No one is censoring anyone else -- in the common use of the word ( "to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable"). One definition of censuring is "to find fault with and criticise as blameworthy." I think that is exactly what is happening, people are finding fault with and criticizing as blameworthy posts that are made that they don't agree with. I don't see anything wrong with that (it's called free speach) and think it's a Good Thing(tm). Now, if we were actually censOring, that would be a totally different matter.

I think that is a problem most people have, not knowing the difference between censoring and censuring, and it appears you have the same misunderstanding. If you don't then good, but do you see how your argument falls apart when the moderator system relies on censure and not censorship?

A possible fault may be that they don't get to note why they moderated up or down, because moderators can't participate in discussions they moderate. However, I believe this is a good thing -- you wouldn't want people to moderate their own comments or those of people who comment on their comments. May be that you could not allow moderation after you made your comments. No, one could moderate a comment up that they planned on replying to and then reply to that comment. Well, if we had these restrictions:

1) You can't moderate your own comments.
2) You can't reply to any comments that you have moderated, or any replies to any comments you have moderated.
3) You can't moderate any replies to your comments.

I don't know it's kind of getting a little complicated. I think the best thing is, just live with it. If you find that you don't fit in with this community, relocate and move somewhere else. We won't kick you out and we can't make you stay. You could always use your preferences so that you don't hear news items concerning Microsoft and/or Linux. Or may be you can get into the practice of changing your threshold to -1 every time you go into a "controversial" story? I think that's one of the reasons why it has been so easy to change your threshold, so you can see all comments if you want to.

Yes, you were whining, and it is not appreciated. There has not been any censorship on /. by the moderators. There has been plenty of censuring by moderators because that's what they've been asked to do. The goal in choosing moderators, to my knowledge, was never to pick those who were "open minded" (the definition of how open minded we wanted them to be if that was the goal would change from person to person). It was to have the moderators act as representatives of the /. community in "scoring" comments based upon their totally subjective worth. If that doesn't work for you don't use the threshold feature and keep yours set to -1.

Did he design a new OS paradigm?

From Merriam-Webster
Main Entry: paradigm
Pronunciation: 'par-&-"dIm also -"dim
Function: noun
Etymology: Late Latin paradigma, from Greek paradeigma, from paradeiknynai to show side by side, from para- + deiknynai to show -- more at DICTION
Date: 15th century
1 : EXAMPLE, PATTERN; especially : an outstandingly clear or typical example or archetype

Could be.

2 : an example of a conjugation or declension showing a word in all its inflectional forms

Probably not

3 : a philosophical and theoretical framework of a scientific school or discipline within which theories, laws, and generalizations and the experiments performed in support of them are formulated

Now here is something. GNU is nice, but you would have to admit, Linux has pushed the GNU movement ahead by leaps and bounds. Linux could be considered the framework

Did he start the whole "put out there and share the code" or the Free Software or Open Source idea?

No, he didn't invent it, only helped it.

Did he rewrite an improved Unix implimentation all by himself based on new ingenious concepts?

Not exactly no. He wrote the orginal kernel which started all this nice AltOS movement. Things don't have to be ingenious to recieve praise. They just have to work better.

did he start a small kernel based on existing and tested ideas and then have thousands of people expand it, imnprove it and make it grow?

Not bad for a college student from Finland who speaks Swedish and has a thing for Penguins.

is he an excellent programmer (probably 100x better than me)?

Never seen ya program...
He has a good work ethic and that is what makes a programmer who he is.

RB

Main Entry: 2cost
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): cost; costing
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French coster, from Latin constare to stand firm, cost -- more at CONSTANT
Date: 14th century
intransitive senses
1 : to require expenditure or payment cost more>
2 : to require effort, suffering, or loss
transitive senses
1 : to have a price of
2 : to cause to pay, suffer, or lose something cost him his job>
3 past costed : to estimate or set the cost of -- often used with out

Merriam-Webster

Main Entry: 2cost
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): cost; costing
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French coster, from Latin constare to stand firm, cost -- more at CONSTANT
Date: 14th century
intransitive senses
1 : to require expenditure or payment cost more>
2 : to require effort, suffering, or loss
transitive senses
1 : to have a price of
2 : to cause to pay, suffer, or lose something cost him his job>
3 past costed : to estimate or set the cost of -- often used with out

Merriam-Webster

On an episode of "Beyond Tomorrow" I saw a few years ago, the show looked at a Japanese corporate restroom. It was rather amazing, and had enough furnishings in it that, if one could find space to add a bed, one would have the equivalent of a fairly good hotel room there. Soothing acquarium to look at, TV set if that's more your thing, refrigerator (IIRC), and the toilet...now that was something else.

Among other things, it had a built-in retractible bidet (check a dictionary if you don't know what that means), and hot air jets to dry off afterward. It wouldn't wipe for you...but it would let you do your business without ever having to reach down there if you so desired.

Freaky.

Main Entry: optimisation, optimise
British variant of OPTIMIZATION, OPTIMIZE

according to Merriam-Webster, but what do they know?

I HOPE I'm not the only one who knows that "optimization" is not a word, and "optimisation" is DEFINATELY not a word.

The following is quoted from the Merriam Webster Online Dictionary

Main Entry: optimization
Pronunciation: "äp-t&-m&-'zA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: 1857
: an act, process, or methodology of making something (as a design, system, or decision) as fully perfect, functional, or effective as possible; specifically : the mathematical procedures (as finding the maximum of a function) involved in this

:)

1. It must appeal to the average person's prurient interest in sex;
   
2. depict sexual conduct in a "patently offensive way" as defined by community standards; and
   
3. taken as a whole, lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.

Main Entry: geek
Pronunciation: 'gEk
Function: noun
Etymology: probably from English dialect geek, geck fool, from Low German geck, from Middle Low German
Date: 1914
1 : a carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off a live chicken or snake
2 : a person often of an intellectual bent who is disapproved of

I believe the usage of "cyber-" referring to computers comes from Norbert Weiner's 1948 paper "Cybernetics" on automatic control systems. According to WWWebster, the Greek kybernan means "govern" in the sense of controlling or steering. In addition, I seem to remember an anecdote that someone suggested the word "Cybernetics" to Weiner as a nonsense word that he could make to mean whatever he wanted.

If you couldn't see it was a joke from the onset, you are sorely lacking in a sense of humor.

Picking up on the whole "tone of voice" thing requires a bit of intelligence -- perhaps -- and likely some critical thinking skills, which, even if you are not retarded, you are definitely lacking.

I am not *convinced* the author of the site is "very intelligent" as you state, but I would at least agree that he is rather bright. As for "cynical", you should probably look that word up (try here for some help). Sarcastic, perhaps. A tendency towards a certain type of humor, most definitely. Cynical - well from the evidence given, no.

Charles de Gaule wrote:

if "administrate" is a verb, i'm charles de gaulle.

For the curious: The Merriam Webster Definition of Administrate (verb)