Slashdot Mirror

Oh jesus christ. Your bullshit is astounding. All your doing is refuting given definitions. Let me show you.

https://www.merriam-webster.co...
"or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas"

https://dictionary.cambridge.o...
"and economic methods"

"https://www.google.com/search?source=hp&ei=DFzPW_zQGuS70PEPyMC9wAo&q=imperialism+definition&oq=imperialism&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0i131l10.7085.7085..9611...1.0..0.92.243.3......0....1j2..gws-wiz.....0.hSdjwZqWRg0"
Well this is the one I originally used and it's pretty clear with "influence through diplomacy or ...."

https://www.collinsdictionary....
"...or a desire for control over other countries."
"the policy and practice of seeking to dominate the economic or political affairs of underdeveloped areas or weaker countries"

"https://www.britannica.com/topic/imperialism"
"... or by gaining political and economic control of other areas"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"or by gaining political and economic control of other areas"
"...or other means."

I know you want to be correct here so bad but literally every definition here proves you wrong.

What's your definition source? I ask because here are six that don't require direct conquest.

https://www.merriam-webster.co...
https://dictionary.cambridge.o...
https://www.google.com/search?... (no idea where google gets its definitions but there it is)
https://www.collinsdictionary....
https://www.britannica.com/top...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
https://en.oxforddictionaries....

Using big words only makes you sound smart when you know their definition.

: the absence of hereditary or arbitrary class distinctions or privileges

Not in this context.

Please provide links to this evidence.

ceoyoyo opined:

It's not really that simple. Hypothesis and theory are a bit ill defined.

The best definition, closest to what is generally used in practice, is that a theory is some kind of logical and/or mathematical framework that provides some explanatory power. A hypothesis is a specific prediction, that can, at least in principle, be tested by experiment.

A good theory should make predictions (generate hypotheses) that can be tested.

Eddington's eclipse expedition tested the hypothesis that starlight would be deflected near the eclipsed sun. This hypothesis is a consequence of Einstein's general theory of relativity.

Merriam-Webster's usage note on the distinction argues, in general, for a definition of the two terms that's a bit closer to mine than yours.

That's not to say you're wrong, nor am I claiming that M-W's note entirely disagrees with the distinction you draw. In fact, your contention that the two terms are "ill-defined" is spot-on, and not everyone in the scientific community uses the term "hypothesis" as I defined it. But many do, and the M-W note concludes that, while theories can and do prompt proposals for experiments to test one or another ramification or effect of the theory itself - and that it is perfectly proper to call those proposals "hypotheses" - my characterization of the word "hypothesis" as meaning "a proposed model that may, over time, and with sufficient experimental confirmation, graduate to the status of a theory" is the definition the note's unidentified author considers the best-accepted one.

Again, though, that doesn't make the definition you put forward in any way wrong or misleading. Instead, the M-W note makes it clear that, as you stated, the distinction drawn between the two terms is not a clear, bright line, even among equally-qualified scientists.

OTOH, my clash with that pretentious twit was an earnest of how the jargon of philosophy discards the term "hypothesis" altogether, in favor of watering down the meaning of the word "theory" to the point where it's essentially indistinguishable from "brainfart" ...

What fucking website is this you are even showing me? I have no interest in picking threw their data to find flaws. FIRST WORD NATIONS WITH GREATER GUN CONTROL HAVE MASSIVELY LOWER HOMICIDE RATES. It's an easily observable statistic based on highly reliable data.

" Firstly the US is a republic not a democracy"

No, it's a democracy under the modern definition of the term. https://www.merriam-webster.co... Nice ignorance though.

"Both are as corrupt as fuck and both totally controlled by special interest groups and big companies, yet one or the other is your only realistically viable choice when voting. Sure you can write-in mickey mouse or vote for independents, but the realistic chance that changes anything is zero. Its all just a part of continuing the grand illusion that Americans have any actual say."

Nice. Your bitterness towards our system does nothing to disprove that people are free to vote for any damn person they want.

At least he's trying.

I won't argue with that

sport spôrt/Submit noun 1. an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.

You made that up yourself? From Merriam-Webster:

sport noun

Definition of sport (Entry 2 of 3)

1a : a source of diversion : recreation

b : a principal calling, vocation, or employment

A big California farmers' lobbying group just blithely signed away farmers' right to access or modify the source code of any farm equipment software.

No swindle at all. Straight out agreement by the farmers' lobbying group.

Just to be sure we're communicating with the same language...

"Can"

"Did"

The next thing you'll claim will be that the Atlas V can't actually lift 18 tonnes to LEO as per ULA's claims because it never did. You really seem to have some cognitive issues.

If you had any ability at all to work with a few numbers, you'd be able to tell the lower bound on the level of Falcon's LEO capacity from the realized GTO flights. But that would involve the knowledge of high school math with you obviously can't be bothered with.

As to your obsession with my comment posting times, I strongly suggest you find a better hobby. I mean, I am flattered to have a groupie, but still...

Just to be sure we're communicating with the same language...

"Can"

"Did"

The next thing you'll claim will be that the Atlas V can't actually lift 18 tonnes to LEO as per ULA's claims because it never did. You really seem to have some cognitive issues.

If you had any ability at all to work with a few numbers, you'd be able to tell the lower bound on the level of Falcon's LEO capacity from the realized GTO flights. But that would involve the knowledge of high school math with you obviously can't be bothered with.

As to your obsession with my comment posting times, I strongly suggest you find a better hobby. I mean, I am flattered to have a groupie, but still...

The ideology that Ford implemented is called Taylorism.

'Neuroticism' not 'neurotic'.

That mistake is about the only legit crit of Damour's memo.

neuroticism noun
neuroticism | \ nu-rä-t-si-zm , nyu- \
Definition of Neuroticism
: a neurotic character, condition, or trait

SJW zeitgeist is to change the meaning of words until they say what you want, but goddamn it's the fucking root word and the definition. You couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

How did Jeff Bezos bilk "millions of normal folks for their hard earned $$'s"?

Tax abatements and shelters, lobbying for legislation that equates to special treatment, regulatory capture - you know, the typical Evil-American-Corporation stuff.

In fairness, all that stuff is only half on him, the other half of blame lies with our elected "representatives" who would rather make sweetheart deals with corporations than actually, you know, represent their constituents.

How did Jeff Bezos bilk "millions of normal folks for their hard earned $$'s"? I'm curious how he conned people into giving them his money via fraud.

It's not in any way "America's peculiar institution".

The phrase peculiar institution has been in use for a long time to refer to slavery in the US. The author was completely justified in using the phrase. The more you know:
Webster's Dictionary
Wikipedia article on book
Let me google that for you

What you have described is not socialism. When the state owns the means of production it is state capitalism.

Here, this should help:

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism

my holy crusade would be quite don-quixotesque.

quixotic

You have confused average with median.

While pedants love to counter with this, you're wrong. In colloquial English, the word "average" means "typical", not necessarily the arithmetic mean. A few sources (from the first three dictionaries that popped up on google):

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/average
https://www.dictionary.com/browse/average?s=t
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/average

Furthermore, the statement assumes that it makes sense to measure intelligence on a single scale; and by far the most common scale to do that is using IQ. IQ tests are designed to result in a normal distribution, which means that both the median and the mean are the same, and so we expect right about 50% of people to have an IQ less than the mean.

Although the other half of me thinks that if you go out and talk to some people on the street, you'll probably conclude that the majority of people are far dumber than average.

BUT we have a cadre of worthless fucking fascists on here who's whole goal is to undermine this country.

Wait, I thought the evil national socialists were the "fucking fascists." You know, the political movement which is by it's nature for an oppressively strong country whose whole goal is to have a strong central government and a stable, i.e. unchanging, autocratic society.

Now fascists do not want a strong central government.

What's the narrative today, it moves so fast we can't keep up.

So yeah in the actual real world context matters.

...while completely ignoring the context and spinning some media presence into being a murderous criminal mobster who takes "hits" out on people by notifying his hitmen by "finger gunning" them on publicly broadcast media.

Meriam Webster Definition of a Hypocrite:

hypocrite
noun hypocrite \ hi-p-krit \
Definition of hypocrite
1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings
— hypocrite adjective

You may believe hate speech is an acceptable form of expression, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's literally defined in the dictionary now

https://www.merriam-webster.co...

People change definitions all the time. For example whole communities have exempted themselves from being racist as described below. This is an obvious double standard but my real question is what if one protected class which allegedly can't be racist says something racist to another protected class? For example if Mexicans complain about blacks is that racist? This is the problem with double standards, they are illogical to begin with so they can't stand up to scrutiny. Citations of rationalizing double standards: https://www.elitedaily.com/lif... https://www.quora.com/Why-do-s...

You may believe hate speech is an acceptable form of expression, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's literally defined in the dictionary now

https://www.merriam-webster.co...

I think you're just feeding a flamboyant troll. My personal theory is that some of the low-digit accounts have been hacked and hijacked by professional trolls. Either that, or more Libertarian insanity. I've yet to meet a Libertarian who actually understood his worship words...

However, these years I prefer to think in terms of solutions. Imagine that the troublemakers, hate speakers in this case, were assisted in rendering themselves invisible? Not absolutely invisible. After all, they still have their rights under the First Amendment (in the American flavor), but if we see a nut screaming conspiracy theories into a bullhorn all of us should also have the right to walk far around him.

My solution approach is currently tagged MEPR for Multidimensional Earned Public Reputation. In Slashdot terms, you might think of it as a kind of symmetric karma on steroids. In mathematical terms, it would be defined as a convergence between what you do in public and how people react to what you did (while also considering the MEPRs of the people with the reactions). It is NOT an attempt to reduce people to a single number (in the Chinese and Facebook fashions), but rather a kind of lens that would help you know where to look and not look.

In theory, this is the kind of thing AI could be good at. In practice, you know the gamesters will look for new wrinkles, so you still have to continue evolving...

Time's up, but ADSAuPR, atAJG.

So is https://www.merriam-webster.co...

You may believe hate speech is an acceptable form of expression, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's literally defined in the dictionary now

https://www.merriam-webster.co...

But surely you aren't claiming that we should all be able to erratically stop for no reason whenever we want on any public road, and reasonably expect that this is not going to result in increased accidents.

Of course not. Something that's accidental is by definition unexpected. Therefore, it's impossible to predict whether stopping erratically will result in more or fewer accidents. It will probably result in more crashes, but that's something completely different.

I think you need to review what regulation means...

Abridge literally means you left no bridge

That is not what "abridge" means. Even considering archaic versions. The origin of "abridge" according to Merriam-Webster is:

Middle English abreggen, abriggen "to reduce, diminish, shorten," borrowed from Anglo-French abreger, going back to Late Latin abbreviare, from Latin ad- + breviare "to shorten, abridge," verbal derivative of brevis "short"

As you can see, it has nothing at all to do with bridges or paths.

The legal definition is "to diminish or reduce in scope". As in: the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be diminished or reduced in scope.

Can we please stop using the words "disrupt" and "disruptive" once and for all? Nowadays in absolute most cases they are egregiously misused.

fit adjective
Definition of fit
1 a (1) : adapted to an end or design : suitable by nature or by art
(2) : adapted to the environment so as to be capable of surviving
b : acceptable from a particular viewpoint (as of competence or morality) : proper
2 a : put into a suitable state : made ready
b : being in such a state as to be or seem ready to do or suffer something
3 : sound physically and mentally : healthy

https://www.merriam-webster.co...

If you ignore the definition 1 a (2) in favour of different definitions, it's your own fault for using language in the wrong fashion.
For instance if you don't ignore it "long survival on little food" can be perfectly described as "adapted to the environment so as to be capable of surviving"; which makes the word "fit" quite fitting (1 b).

> bully pulpit

Before anyone else gets their panties in a knot, that's a horrible coining by Theodore Roosevelt. I doubt most people know the difference between:

* bully, the adjective; which means "fine; excellent; very good."
* bully, the noun; which means "a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person"

Ok, I just did exactly that, and the very first example the dictionary gives is: "the data is plentiful and easily available"

So, by your chosen authority, the word "data" can correctly be used in singular form.

Debate closed.

hobby noun: a pursuit outside one's regular occupation engaged in especially for relaxation

So by that definition, even following trending stuff on Twitter counts, unless they're paid to do it of course.

perspective ==> prospective

<rant>

<del>test</del>: test ...broken
<strike>test</strike>: test ...broken
<s>test</s>: test ...broken

It's bloody 2018 and slashdot still doesn't support strikeout... FFS, no wonder the site is dying.

That should have been able to be written as:

<del> perspective </del> prospective
...or...
<strike> perspective </strike> prospective

If the people running slashdot (this week... who is it now?) call you for a job interview, you'd be wise to tell them that you'd really prefer not to work for someone who doesn't properly maintain their software.

</rant>

perspective ==> prospective

<rant>

<del>test</del>: test ...broken
<strike>test</strike>: test ...broken
<s>test</s>: test ...broken

It's bloody 2018 and slashdot still doesn't support strikeout... FFS, no wonder the site is dying.

That should have been able to be written as:

<del> perspective </del> prospective
...or...
<strike> perspective </strike> prospective

If the people running slashdot (this week... who is it now?) call you for a job interview, you'd be wise to tell them that you'd really prefer not to work for someone who doesn't properly maintain their software.

</rant>

perspective ==> prospective

<rant>

<del>test</del>: test ...broken
<strike>test</strike>: test ...broken
<s>test</s>: test ...broken

It's bloody 2018 and slashdot still doesn't support strikeout... FFS, no wonder the site is dying.

That should have been able to be written as:

<del> perspective </del> prospective
...or...
<strike> perspective </strike> prospective

If the people running slashdot (this week... who is it now?) call you for a job interview, you'd be wise to tell them that you'd really prefer not to work for someone who doesn't properly maintain their software.

</rant>

It's sooo cute how you ignore words that might make a dent in your narrative.

Definition of vape
vaped; vaping
transitive + intransitive
: to inhale vapor through the mouth from a usually battery-operated electronic device (such as an electronic cigarette) that heats up and vaporizes a liquid or solid

This electronic cigarette contains a small reservoir of liquid nicotine solution that is vaporized to form an aerosol mist. The user "vapes," or puffs on the vapor, to get a hit of the addictive nicotine —John Tierney

When a person tokes, eats or vapes cannabis, a wave of THC, or tetrahydrocannabinol, washes into the brain. —Laura Sanders

https://www.merriam-webster.co...

...and they are probably very happy of not having a wikipedia page. They are better known in their field thanks to the work they did, the students they taught, and the papers they published on international journals. Si monumentum requiris, circumspice

Grand parent is absolutely right. Piracy used to be the unlicensed distribution of unlicensed copyrighted material, while unlicensed copies for private use were just mere infringements. Noone would ever call the creator of mix tapes a pirate, when he only gave them to his friends.

Interestingly, the cambridge dictionary sticks with the old definition, while the RIAA already got to merriam webster

cambridge dicitonary
Merriam-webster

Oh, really?:

snip:

6 a : a usually creatively improvised solution to a computer hardware or programming problem or limitation

6 c: a clever tip or technique for doing or improving something

So, when you said "Hacks are by definition inelegant abominations," you apparently didn't bother to look up the definition.

What have we learned today? That language is sloppy and the same word can be used differently by different groups of people.

So...much...mistake...in so...few..words......can't resist...

It is basically a cult. Rei is a huge cult member.

A little exaggeration here? May I help you with the definition of a cult?

It makes no sense to be so devoted to a company

Let's see... /. have always be the nest of Programmers, Engineers and scientists and Elon Musk portfolio kinda fall in all three categories. And in case you didn't noticed, he make an "American Space" company that make an rocket that land on the very own launch pad, a new "American Car" company that created the very first successful electric car, an Online Bank to pay for your stuff and a few others.

So, yeah, it really doesn't make any sense that folks here like the guys and his companies.

especially one that makes toys for the 1%

I see you failed to recognize the pattern. Let me draw this for you :

2008 : Roadster were released. Now ~2,500 Roadsters at ~100,000$
2012 : Model S were released. Now ~200,000 Model at an ~90,000$ average
2018 : ~60,000 Model 3 made already at a ~50,000$. And I've read that there's about 500,000 reservation.

Now come on. You can do it. Read the number.

If they were concerned about the environment they wouldn't be "investing" in a company that makes $60,000 cars!

Considering that transportation is the main source of greenhouse gas, I would say it help "pretty much".

These people are out of touch with reality.

Yeah....or maybe that you are out of touch with the reality of about everyone here (except maybe a few AC).

Well, one of us is full of feces, and it looks like it's you.

No, I don't believe I did. Feces.

In several languages (at least Hebrew and Latin), your "Lord" and "Master" are the same word.

As usual, you won't provide any citations for what you're saying, because you're wrong. So I'll just leave the the dictionary here for you.

1 : to encroach upon in a way that violates law or the rights of another

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.co...

1 Actively break the terms of (a law, agreement, etc.)
2 Act so as to limit or undermine (something); encroach on.

Source: https://en.oxforddictionaries....

According to these definitions: theft, as an act of violating the (terms of) law or rights of another, it certainly is a form of infringement - all crime would be a form of infringement in one or another way. However the point is that not every infringement is also theft.
Think of cows for example. They're mammals or even more abstract vertebrates. But is every mammal or vertebrate a cow? Of thing of fingers and thumbs. Every thumb is a finger, but is every finger also a thumb?
Similar to thumbs or cows in the above analogy, theft is a very special case of infringement. Certain criteria must be fulfilled to call it theft. Therefore, at least sometimes, we express what kind of right is infringed - like in "copyright infringement", which signifies that ... the exclusive right of making copies, which is reserved by the right holder, is violated.

If it comes from a plant it is by definition not milk.

Whenever someone makes a "by definition" argument, I open up a dictionary. Those people are usually wrong. There are a lot of new products calling themselves milk, but soy milk and coconut milk have been around for a long time (hundreds of years, if not longer) and are well established by those names. More than long enough to get a spot in the dictionary anyway.

While I was at it, I looked up juice. Soy and coconut would certainly qualify, but the definitions for juice are extremely broad. Cow milk could also be called juice, by that definition.

If it comes from a plant it is by definition not milk.

Whenever someone makes a "by definition" argument, I open up a dictionary. Those people are usually wrong. There are a lot of new products calling themselves milk, but soy milk and coconut milk have been around for a long time (hundreds of years, if not longer) and are well established by those names. More than long enough to get a spot in the dictionary anyway.

While I was at it, I looked up juice. Soy and coconut would certainly qualify, but the definitions for juice are extremely broad. Cow milk could also be called juice, by that definition.