Slashdot Mirror

"subliterate" (n): someone who knows only a subset of the English language. Example: you.

Here, enlarge that subset a little.

Here. Definition #5.

You don't? Merriam-Webster sees it differently:

Definition of CONSUME
transitive verb
1: to do away with completely : destroy (fire consumed several buildings)
2 a: to spend wastefully : squander
2 b: use up (writing consumed much of his time)
3 a: to eat or drink especially in great quantity (consumed several bags of pretzels)
3 b: to enjoy avidly : devour (mysteries, which she consumes for fun — E. R. Lipson)
4: to engage fully : engross (consumed with curiosity)
5: to utilize as a customer (consume goods and services)

intransitive verb
1: to waste or burn away: perish
2: to utilize economic goods

But be that as it may, the original complainer didn't seem to be annoyed by the term "consumed", but by the "content which requires flash" construction; else his alternative suggestions would probably have been along the lines of "wants to watch content which requires Flash".

Webster's Dictionary disagrees.

Definition of INSURE
transitive verb
1: to provide or obtain insurance on or for
2: to make certain especially by taking necessary measures and precautions

Much of the bias and arrogance in the modern scientific establishment is do people attempting to use science to push athiesm, totalitarinism, libralism , communism, fundamentalism or whatever other ism is out there while the whole time abusing the scientific process.

Like capitalism? Or... hang on... theologism?

On a circle the furthest a point can be from another point is at the other end of a diameter from it. A diameter also is the combination of two radii at 180degrees to one another. I can point you to a definition of diametric that means "completely opposed : being at opposite extremes (e.g. 'in diametric contradiction to his claims')".

When Slur used the term "diametrically-opposed" he implied one or all of these meanings, that metaphorically the suspension of habeus corpus and due process is as far from America's founding principles as possible, and/or facing the opposite direction.

Um, it is in English.

Polemic:

b. the art or practice of disputation or controversy —usually used in plural but singular or plural in construction

It should have been polemical (polemic is the noun) but it is English. From Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/polemical) :

polemical adj 1: of, relating to, or being a polemic : controversial 2: engaged in or addicted to polemics : disputatious

Unfortunately there's no mod for ignoramous so I had to.... oh right, simple English. So I guess that's just "dumb-ass" then (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dumb-ass).

You don't have to be so xenophobic. It was in the quote of the article. /. shouldn't have to simplify/edit a quote every time there's a big scary looking word in it.

A blogger is a professional journalist if they're making their living at it. It makes no difference how trivial the material they cover is, it's a matter of definition.

Blogger is not a synonym for journalist. Thus, a blogger is a professional blogger if they're making their living at it. They might or might not also be journalists, depending which definition of the word you use: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/journalism.

Personally, I prefer this one: "writing characterized by a direct presentation of facts or description of events without an attempt at interpretation", which means that a subset of people who write blogs are journalist, just like a subset of people who work at news organizations are journalists. By some of the definitions, essentially all bloggers are journalists, by other definitions none of them are. (Unless you argue that blog is a ((And not just equivalent to)) newspaper or magazine. I won't go there.)

Corporatism.is not a REAL word. Its not in the dictionary so it is not a real word

Ahem:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/corporatism

First known use 1890, bitch!

You must not know what HSLDA is.

Not when we started this discussion, no. But they do have a clear agenda, which by definition makes anything they put out propaganda:
"ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause".

No, you don't have to become a nanny state to address family problems. Parents have to address their children, and society has to address the family unit on a much larger level. The state cannot function as surrogate normalized family.

You are missing the point. I am not talking about what you call the "nanny state" (which, quite frankly, americans tend to call any government that gives even the smallest bit of damn about its population).

If the purpose of school is to teach, then things that interfere with that purpose need to be addressed. If pupils fail because of family problems, the school needs to take those into account. If the issues make teaching in general impossible because, say, the kids don't have the discipline required to attend a class, then that needs to be taught in school, because otherwise the rest of it is just a waste of time.

It can't for very long without giving rise to despotism. You might recall some failures on your side of the pond.

Anectodes do not make a proof. The scandinavian countries are counter examples for extremely "socialst" states by US standards, and a very strong school system - which has collected world-wide praise for decades. And no despotism in sight.

At what point was the ineffectiveness of the talking-head model not obviously deficient?

Hinsight is always 20/20. Obviously, there was a point where this was not obvious, else it would never have become a method.

It was *already* obvious that if you spend time in as small groups as possible, educational achievement directly increases.

Almost, but not entirely true. There is an optimum size and it is not one. "as small as possible" is not 100% true. Yes, most classes are too large. But for most cases, a small group is better than working alone. Also, social skills (part of the hidden curriculum) need a certain group size.

It's clear at this point you don't understand homeschooling.

Not as well as someone who's actually doing it, for obvious reasons. But like most things, understanding is not binary. That I don't understand 100% does not mean I don't understand at all.

specifically the 10 Commandments, upon which the understanding of Western law resides

Err... no. Western law resides largely on roman law. The 10 commandments are not laws in even the most forgiving definition of the word. They are commandments.

And even with the extended explanation, I still disagree completely. Lawless people don't need laws, and we don't need laws to deal with them. All we need is police. All the "righteous" (however you define it, let's just assume that's not the issue) people already agree that murder, stealing, etc. are bad. The purpose of law is to guard the good people - but not against the bad, because the bad will ignore the law anyways. To guard against mistakes, temptation and itself - a large part of the law is defining violations clearly so innocents aren't punished.

Hopefully, reason will prevail and German law will change for the better, as it has in the past.

Unlikely. Even the European Court of Human Rights has upheld the german law on this question. Politically, there is almost no support. Most homeschoolers or those who'd like it are religious extremists who don't want to have their kids get basic sex education. In the US that may have enough public support to change laws, in Germany people like that are ridiculed and considered idiots, fanatics, dangerous or all

haha, i think she meets def #2: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lie

I'd rather they interred Americans in camps before they ignore scientists.

I think the word you're looking for is intern - unless you think the government buried citizens of Japanese descent?

It made sense during WWII to inter the Japanese

No, it didn't. No more so than Americans of German descent. It was racism, pure and simple.

because we had no way of knowing who might do what, sorry to say

Just like you have no way of knowing what, oh, anybody might do?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/missile

seems to disagree.

Wait, you've identified a gene sequence for "being a welfare recipient"?

Note that I don't approve of the idea, but how in the heck would this be eugenics? You do know that eugenics has to do with inheritable characteristics, right?
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eugenics

-- Terry

Just thought I'd mention it. "Aging" is not a word in the English dictionary.

If you say so.

drug

A dictionary will give you a good definition too; and rather less manipulated by either side.
eg: merriam-webster

I certainly intended it in the 'broad' sense of: causing harm to animals in a scientific context.

Actually, I am a Brit - and it is the standard English English use of the term I am defending.

Seriously?!? This makes it twice as disturbing as before. For your benefit I will copy my post from above just to make damn sure you see many examples of how wrong you can be:

I don't see what difference it makes having a qualifier attached to the word, as anyone with a basic grasp of conversational English will have heard the word state being used in this manner.

However, since you insist on an example, please see here
You'll probably complain about State Aid being a qualifier - but if you look further down you will see exactly the example you want, on a .Gov site from a State within the EU:

(I've emphasised the relevant parts just in case you are as daft as you seem)

Is the measure granted by the state or through state resources? As well as central government departments, this includes regional or local authorities and other public, or private sector, bodies designated or controlled by the state. State resources include tax exemptions and also funds not permanently belonging to the state but under state control, e.g. lottery funding.

There are a shit-load of examples of this use of the word 'state' all over that site and in everyday conversational English (UK English that is) that refer to 'the state'. Here's a few more:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/state

15. of or pertaining to the central civil government or authority.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state

5
a : a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory; especially : one that is sovereign
b : the political organization of such a body of people
6: the operations or concerns of the government of a country

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/state

2: a nation, or a country
3: the government of a country

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/state_1

[C or U] a country or its government
The drought is worst in the central African states.
Britain is one of the member states of the European Union.
The government was determined to reduce the number of state-owned industries.
Some theatres receive a small amount of funding from the state.
formal His diary included comments on affairs/matters of state (= information about government activities).

in state
If a king, queen or government leader does something in state, they do it in a formal way as part of an official ceremony
The Queen rode in state to the opening of Parliament.

This is too stupid and arrogant to actually be a troll right?

I don't see what difference it makes having a qualifier attached to the word, as anyone with a basic grasp of conversational English will have heard the word state being used in this manner.

However, since you insist on an example, please see here.

You'll probably complain about State Aid being a qualifier - but if you look further down you will see exactly the example you want, on a .Gov site from a State within the EU:

(I've emphasised the relevant parts just in case you are as daft as you seem)

Is the measure granted by the state or through state resources? As well as central government departments, this includes regional or local authorities and other public, or private sector, bodies designated or controlled by the state. State resources include tax exemptions and also funds not permanently belonging to the state but under state control, e.g. lottery funding.

There are a shit-load of examples of this use of the word 'state' all over that site and in everyday conversational English (UK English that is) that refer to 'the state'. Here's a few more:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/state

15. of or pertaining to the central civil government or authority.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/state

5
a : a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory; especially : one that is sovereign
b : the political organization of such a body of people
6: the operations or concerns of the government of a country

http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/state

2: a nation, or a country
3: the government of a country

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/state_1

[C or U] a country or its government
The drought is worst in the central African states.
Britain is one of the member states of the European Union.
The government was determined to reduce the number of state-owned industries.
Some theatres receive a small amount of funding from the state.
formal His diary included comments on affairs/matters of state (= information about government activities).

in state
If a king, queen or government leader does something in state, they do it in a formal way as part of an official ceremony
The Queen rode in state to the opening of Parliament.

You're demonstrating dangerous levels of arrognorance -- the ignorance to form conclusions that are not just wrong, but stupid wrong, combined with the arrogance to dictate to others that your conclusion is correct and they are wrong.

For your ignorance, see Merriam-Webster:

5 a : a politically organized body of people usually occupying a definite territory; especially : one that is sovereign

(Sorry, there's no link for humility; good luck with that problem.)

The summary meant "trawled" of course. Trolling the users would imply Facebook posting fake messages from friends telling them to do it.

Except, outside of the internet, that word doesn't always mean what you describe.

In this case, 'troll' is a perfectly legitimate usage of the word.

Alright, thank you for confirming my initial impression. You're not only overly aggressive and ignorant, but also unfamiliar with dictionaries. Pro tip: If you're about to lash out, at least make sure you're on solid ground before you say something embarrassing. "God damned arrogant", indeed. *Pssst, your fly is open.*

It only sounds pagan because you have no actual concept of what paganism is.

You're just inserting your definition of paganism. A dictionary reference:

"1: heathen 1; especially : a follower of a polytheistic religion (as in ancient Rome) 2: one who has little or no religion and who delights in sensual pleasures and material goods : an irreligious or hedonistic person 3: neo-pagan"

What's being discussed are religious practices from thousands of years ago. Try reading the reference to Jeremiah 10:1-5 and then explaining how paganism doesn't apply.

Correct, that has been what I was saying the entire time. Now, introducing: dictionary. Work specifically aimed to clarify exact meanings of words.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/computer
"one that computes; specifically : a programmable usually electronic device that can store, retrieve, and process data".

And no, prejudice is not racism (even if racism can be considered a form of prejudice).

I'm pretty sure adapt is the correct term. to make fit (as for a new use) often by modification An adaptation in biology is a trait with a current functional role in the life history of an organism that is maintained and evolved by means of natural selection.

I'd prefer a reliable dictionary over wikipedia, like any one of:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/misogyny
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/misogyny
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/misogyny

Or if we must, the first line of wikipedia:
Misogyny (play /msdni/) is the hatred or dislike of women or girls.

And not some random person's interpretation that happened to be picked by some wikipedia editor.

You're such a geek no I mean nerd no wait.... what where we talking about?

http://xkcd.com/747/

You're such a geek no I mean nerd no wait.... what where we talking about?

http://xkcd.com/747/

Psh, semantics! You're just a dork !

You're such a geek no I mean nerd no wait.... what where we talking about?

You're such a geek no I mean nerd no wait.... what where we talking about?

I have the right to a trial by jury, with a lawyer provided for me if needed.

rule of thumb
Definition of RULE OF THUMB
1: a method of procedure based on experience and common sense
2: a general principle regarded as roughly correct but not intended to be scientifically accurate

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/rule%20of%20thumb

It's also worth mentioning that the limits placed on the judicial process are intended to ensure that your freedom isn't taken away without a damn good reason. That puts it in a whole different category. It's a method for safeguarding all your other rights, not a natural right in and of itself. Still, there's no point in arguing over details - I used the phrase "rule of thumb" for a reason.

"Wrong" is an adverb. Coincidentally, M-W uses the word "incorrectly" as a synonym.

A judge ruling in favor of a company seeking to protect their trademarks is not government censorship.

Since when does "government" have anything to do with it?

to suppress or delete as objectionable
Merriam-Webster

This is textbook suppression. It doesn't matter who does it, or even the particular mechanism, but if the delisting from all (or even just some) web search engines doesn't qualify as an attempt to suppress, I don't know what does.

Are you referring to GIMP or the long version: "GNU Image Manipulation Program"?

Because the short version seems perfectly fine to me... Unless you think it's too close to imp and that is somehow a terrible thing...

Defintion of Gimp:

1: cripple 1a

2: limp <walks with a gimp — Damon Runyon>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anthropomorphism

It requires faith on my part to believe that the 1001st time I drop the rock it will also drop to the ground.

You are abusing the word "faith" here.

You think you are going for b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust (see m-w for full listing), but you aren't.

Using the word "faith" in this context is dishonest. The word you want to use is "prediction". There is no faith in any meaningful sense of the word involved. In the extremely general over-broad meaning that you are aiming for, everything would require "faith" - drawing breath and "believing" that you will again be inhaling air and not suddenly a toxic gas, gravity not turning upsides-down, everything.

But that isn't what the word "faith" implies. Rather, consistency of experience is a base assumption about reality that we learn to make very, very early on. You are abusing the word "faith" and trying to extend its meaning well beyond what it really means.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/modern

I'd say it's a relatively recent phenomenon for people to hold all religions, rather than a specific subset in contempt.

I point this out only because the rest of your post was well written:
You probably meant 'I shudder to think'.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shudder
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shutter

I point this out only because the rest of your post was well written:
You probably meant 'I shudder to think'.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shudder
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shutter

Probably some sexy decedent of Siri. I hope she doesn't turn out to be a bitch.

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Ditto, I'm in the throws of producing a PP slide brief and it too is excruciating.

Watch those homophones in your presentation, a mistake like that could cost you a grant. I believe the word you were looking for is "throes".

Are you trolling, or are you just being stupid? The name of the game is "LEGO Universe". The quoted statement can be interpreted in two ways based on the two meanings of "universe" in this context, one of them being a (very slightly) humorous exaggeration--it's a textbook pun: "the usually humorous use of a word in such a way as to suggest two or more of its meanings or the meaning of another word similar in sound."

If you're going to nitpick something related to this story, go with the "wiith" from the announcement's second paragraph.

it's bold faced socialism

Bald. Bald-faced. Not bold faced.

Ah, Wikipedia, that most reliable of sources... Would you please read this?

Try this for size; I did some collaboration with Dr. Jolanda Tromp after meeting her at a LUG open day, from which I started the research on IRC. This was while she was writing her paper on CoVEn and following projects (IIRC CoVEn got an extension of four years), out of which she gained her post-Doctorate. I have a hardcopy of her thesis "Systematic Usability Design and Evaluation for Collaborative Virtual Environments (2001)" which she personally gave me in recognition of my efforts. Then she moved into a cave house in Spain and we kept in touch for a few years via Second Life (Bluepill island) after that.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fundamental

The definition I think we are using in this conversation is "belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics". I do not consider "the plane dropping you can be damaged" to be an innate, ingrained characteristic of conventional bombs. From suicide bombers to remotely activated IUDs, the risk to the person bombing somebody has never been an innate part of bombing itself. I don't think a nuke fundamentally changes any characteristics of bomb. It is, to me, A REALLY BIG FAT FUCKING HUGE BOMB.

Arguing against myself - The radioactivity may constitute a fundamental difference. Someone other than me should have mentioned that, probably would have shut me up before I wrote all this, haha.

They're using a new algorithm to capture the MRI data. Why is that unclear? They didn't claim anything like "invented a new basic computer science algorithm".

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plan
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/goal
And if you disagree, go yell at the AC to whom I was replying.