Slashdot Mirror

From the Merrim-Webster dictionary definition of wowser:

chiefly Australian : an obtrusively puritanical person

Incorrect.
To literally sugarcoat means to coat with sugar.
The alternative, to figuratively sugarcoat (i.e. the figure of speech) is to make appear more pleasant or acceptable.

Not really, there are 2 definitions of literally: actually, and figuratively.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/literally

Just another auto-antonym.

More like a derivative of abrogate, as in the course of action they took to abolish the effectiveness of one Dmitry Sklyarov for pointing out how silly their "encryption" was at a security conference.

edicted?

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

Fuck, dude... just fuck.

If they had survived service would not have been interrupted based in normal use, not a reduction

I don't think 2M people in a few square miles all texting, pic/vid messaging, and calling is "normal use".

Mitigating any *major* issues brought about with extreme usage is survival, to me.

Except that "perfect" doesn't mean flawless, but rather it means complete. It's not about a union without flaws, it's about a union without state-by-state insurgence.

According to Merriam Webster dictionary the first definition is about flawless. The 5th definition is about being complete. Also the most common use of perfection is not about complete first -it is a state of flawlessness. Typically, when something is flawless there is no way to make it better so it is thusly complete. But being complete is not the first answer
Synonyms: Perfect, Whole, Entire, Intact. Entire has an "implies" and then completeness. But considering the size of the entry, this is small
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perfect

The framers of our constitution never intended for the consititution to be perfect or complete - it is a living body to be changed as the times changed. They were also arrogant SOBs and some of them were fairly racist (e.g. the three fifths clause). Thank god they had the forsight to realize someone may want to edit this document in the future.

definition of monetize

The term dates back to 1879 the usage has just been adapted but the underlying theme is the same. To convert into money.

Now go back to your support line.

You sure you know what a synonym is?

Ex.

Man, the RIAA just sued me for copyright infringement.

or

Man, the RIAA just sued me for router.

Man, the RIAA just sued me for grandmother.

Man, the RIAA just sued me for human ear.

Man, the RIAA just sued me for Google.

Man, the RIAA just sued me for dead person.

Just because something is associated with another thing does not automatically make them synonyms.

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

Often when I get into intractable arguments like this, it turns out in the end that the disagreement boils down to differing definitions of a specific word. In this case, I suspect it is 'philosophy'. Merriam Webster has a few definitions, of which 'pursuit of wisdom' would probably satisfy those lumping science in with philosophy. On the other hand, 'a search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather than observational means' would tend to exclude science.

Science used to be called Natural Philosophy, and can still be regarded as a sub-discipline of philosophy. It's just a branch that (largely) takes as axioms that it is sensible and practical to observe the world, perform experiments, and draw conclusions from that activity. It looks like a successful approach to me, but what do I know?

It probably doesn't matter in this forum which definition you use; what matters most on the internet is that the other guy is wrong. (And if you think I'm talking about you, I'm not. It's the other guy who's actually wrong. We are right-on here. Yes sir! Go us. we rock.

You have a small particle or speck with sharks?

It's moat...

Reading elsewhere, I think you're right, Rasta. That said, minimal skills enough skills to become productive in jobs such as auto mechanic, etc. should theoretically involve knowing when to ask for help -- and dropping out of college for two whole semesters instead of finding someone to help her strikes me as either A) hard to believe (i.e. the story is a fake, or there are other factors we're not being told, like maybe she didn't have the money, and is instead blaming her situation on the computer snafu), or B) indicative of someone for whom a level roughly equivalent to that of upperclassmen at a leading high school is still beyond her reach (i.e. a moron). And, by saying "moron", I mean this not as a pejorative, but rather a descriptive -- "a mildly mentally retarded person". Dropping out of school, not because you can't figure out a consumer electronics device, but because you can't figure out how to ask for help implies an extremely limited and impaired capacity for judgment and rational thinking.

Cheers,

"You seem to be unaware what the meaning of the word lie means so I thought I should take the opportunity to educate you. For something to be a lie intent is required, a false statement without intent to deceive is simply a false statement."

Funny how in all that spew you totally forgot to apologize for "being factually incorrect" and trolling me because you weren't diligent enough to read the whole thread.

Since you also appear to be stupid, I'll fix your ignorance about lying too

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie

"Fabrication
A fabrication is a lie told when someone submits a statement as truth, without knowing for certain whether or not it actually is true. Although the statement may be possible or plausible, it is not based on fact. Rather, it is something made up, or it is a misrepresentation of the truth. Examples of fabrication: "The dog ate my homework", or "I did unplug the iron".

OOPS! You were wrong again (I'll be charitable and not point out that you were also lying again).

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

1 b: an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker

OOPS! you're STILL wrong. NO INTENT REQUIRED.

So, you lied. The fact that you posted what you THINK a lie is changes nothing because you were ignorant about that too.

Of course, you'll NEVER admit it, you're a cowardly piece of shit, and we both know you're not man enough to own up.

Go ahead, run and hide, you're a bitch and that what lying bitches do.

indecent: grossly improper or offensive

I find a lot of laws to be grossly improper or offensive to me; can I have the law makers arrested? Tim S

>>There's a lot worser things than people using spreadsheet formulas.

>Indeed. Consider people inventing new words, for instance.

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

Whenever I see 'I lolled', I am tempted to ask why we need to know about their sleep habits.

automagically

you can't imagine why they would do that? LOL!

-------> (joke)







You

It seems you are not familiar with sarcasm. Are you new here?

Digitalize[2], a synonym for digitize.

"Digitalize" has been a transitive verb meaning to convert an analog signal to digital since 1962.

"I will not weaponize space." (and technically, weaponize doesn't mean what his puppeteers think it means)

"I count him braver who overcomes his desires than him who conquers his enemies; for the hardest victory is over self." Aristotle

One not need to be at war to achieve victory, an accomplishment of a goal will do quite nicely.

1 : the overcoming of an enemy or antagonist
2 : achievement of mastery or success in a struggle or endeavor against odds or difficulties
Merriam-Webster

Hey, is begging for donations for months no advertisement? Then what?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/advertisement says on advertisement:
1: the act or process of advertising
2: a public notice ; especially : one published in the press or broadcast over the air

It's just another form. I basically don't care which one they use, but the reward of the community could have serious effect on the integrity of article neutrality. There is where I kind of agree. (Not that it would be there for more controversial stuff anyway).

a better tact would be ...

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

Tact: "a keen sense of what to do or say in order to maintain good relations with others or avoid offense"

Possibly what you meant: Tack: "...the alignment of a sailing vessel with respect to the wind when moving upwind." Commonly used as a synonym for "strategy," as choosing the right tack at the right time can win or lose a race.

If you want to nitpick, at least do it right: it's "virii".

Maybe you should instead.

> You can't "forget to copyright" something
> because copyright is not a verb.

        Wrong. Websters.
        http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/copyright%5B2%5D

        (1) noun, (2) verb, (3) adjective.

        Cite your source.

The Titanic was an example of what should be called Cockyisms. (The beliefe that one is better or their product is better than it truly is.) in this case, Unsinkable...and we all know how THAT turned out!

There already is a word: Hubris

some dictionaries disagree

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/giga
http://www.reference.com/search?q=Giga

BTW, it does come from the greek word gigas, which like the word giant, is pronounced with a soft g

http://www.backyardgardener.com/gardendictionary/gigas.html

For the pedant in all of us, the GP is correct. Etymonline explains how the -pi inflection results from an overgeneralization of the latin -us to -i pluralization (eg. status -> stati, terminus -> termini), but octopus is Greek (oktopous), not Latin, and the plural of pous (foot) is podes.

Unforutunately (of fortunately, depending on your stance), many of these words are losing their original inflectional category and are being "regularized" to the more Englishy -es (octopuses, statuses, terminuses). Many dictionaries (or the one you provided) don't even list "octopodes" as a plural (and they even list "octopi" since it's taken on a kind of folk-correctness). In order of historical correctness, it would be "octopodes" > "octopuses" > "octopi". In order of usage (and general acceptance by the masses) it would be "octopuses" > "octopi" > "octopodes"

Now, if we all spoke Chinese or Japanese, there would almost be no such thing as "plural inflection" (imagine all nouns being like mass nouns... "one octopus", "two octopus").

Dear AC,

As something of a Spelling Nazi myself, I'd advise you to be very, very sure of yourself before dipping your toes into that particular pond, lest you set yourself up for an epic and embarrassing fail, as in fact you've just done. :)

Actually, either "aviatrices" or "aviatrixes" is correct.

BTW, the Firefox built-in spellchecker "knows" only the latter by default.

There is something wrong but interesting about the idea that a computer simulation can explain what happened in a real-life incident. In the normal usage of "explain", only causally-related events can explain other events.

Huh? The dictionary definition of explain pretty much matches how I've used it and seen it used all my life - and bears no relation to your "definition".

How is it defined by our governments?

The dictionary defines it as

"the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"

It seems that the current *real* definition is "doing anything that a government or a private security employee sees as suspicious."

I am concerned by the lack of clarity and the over-reaching powers given to all kinds of enforcement agencies (I wouldn't call all of these "law-" enforcement).

Are we (the U.S.) becoming a society with anonymous reporting of "suspicious" activity and warrantless arrests? Are we scared enough to allow our guard dogs to tear apart anyone they or their masters don't like, just because?

Who is really safe in such an environment?

Everyone has their rational and semi-rational anxiety, fears and suspicions. Giving power to these is destroying our society and pissing me off.

Obviously we are not ready to fight for our freedoms and therefore don't deserve to be free. Meanwhile it's becoming more difficult and dangerous to do so without having one's own life destroyed (activists ending up on terrorist lists etc.)

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

the people of Google are worthy of our complete trust

You forgot the <sarcasm> tag...or look up the meaning of "naive".

Methodologies. Now apologize to the nice man, and go clean your room.

a monogamous lesbian, and she only liked other females of a certain colour

Monogamous?

Bravo!

The correct word for this _is_ espionage.

One online dictionary says that espionage is:

: the practice of spying or using spies to obtain information about the plans and activities especially of a foreign government or a competing company

I guess they need an update inasmuch as spies can now be computer operators or programmers, for that matter.

Despite that, it's far more buzz-wordy to say duhn du duh "Cyber Warfare" because it sounds really complex and technological, and when you say it lots of people think you know what you are talking about. And of course, any time that you use 'warfare' joe 6pack knows that we must have/get the government involved to protect us citizens if there is a war going on.

If you're going to be a grammar nazi, learn some grammar. "Stupider" is perfectly acceptable usage.

If you're going to be a grammar nazi, learn some grammar. "Stupider" is perfectly acceptable usage..

" a feeble or ridiculous imitation " ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parody )

Imitation.

If would have been hugely parodyc to build a similar website, that could have got feeds from Amazon itself mind you, and to prominently put the button there.

That is parody.

To do so on top of the website itself is not parody, is naked provocation, almost trolling, which seems to be working nicely.

Nothing mysterious about the effects of the so called "Mental Body-Swapping".

As for empathy... see the Wikipedia link above.
There are a shitload of theories, research and results about it.

And "unknown" and "mysterious" don't mean exactly the same thing.

Nothing mysterious about the effects of the so called "Mental Body-Swapping".

As for empathy... see the Wikipedia link above.
There are a shitload of theories, research and results about it.

And "unknown" and "mysterious" don't mean exactly the same thing.

spelt

chiefly British past and past participle of SPELL

sensationalise

libellous

sensationalise

libellous

well yeah! it JUST works!

Author is Pedantic

No he isn't. He critisizes the incorrect use and application of the term MVC and the misconception and the pointless enforcement of a wrong concept of MVC in places where it is often more than pointless to do so. Like in most modern web application scenarious.

I think you just pretty much quoted the dictionary definition of a pedant, specifically definition 2B.

Rather a lot like I'm doing now. </pedantic>

where were you, when the term "Bushitler" was passed around?

Actually, that's the first time I've heard the term, so that may be a good question.

Face it, a mere allegation of any similarity with Hitler is a powerful assault and I don't remember much opposition to that before.

Valid similarities to Hitler's actions and policies are, of course, a powerful assault. Stuff like what you've posted are called "jokes." I won't bother to explain it, though...in the words of Saavik, "Humor. It is a difficult concept."

I have no idea why you didn't hear the opposition to comparisons of Bush with Hitler. They were there, and calls that the thread had been godwined were everywhere.

That's not to say that comparisons to Hitler are automatically invalid, but you need to justify the comparison with examples of the similar reprehensible actions. Not just any action that Hitler took, but the actions that caused him to be labeled "evil." Obviously Hitler took a shit every once in a while, but a comparison between you and Hitler because you also take a shit every once in a while doesn't tell anybody anything about what type of person you are. Other than admitting that Hitler was actually human, which is pretty offensive to the rest of us who are part of the same species, I suppose.

The point here was to simply remind, that Fascism and Socialism (whatever their merits) are no different from each other.

I know that's what you were trying to do, but my point was that not everything Hitler did or say was fascist or socialist just because he was pushing that agenda. So quoting him to make that point is an invalid argument.

In fact, Hitler's party was called "National Socialism Party". Thus pitching them as some sort of opposites is just that: a false dichotomy.

Oh please, that's called marketing. The Democratic Party call themselves democrats so the party can't POSSIBLY do anything undemocratic, huh? Google's motto is "do no evil" but that doesn't stop them from censoring web pages in China, right?

Well, honestly, what stronger evidence of something being Fascism can there be, than "Hitler said it"?

Ok, let me help you out. First, use the accepted definition of Fascism. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, it is a political philosophy that places the nation and/or race above the individual, with a centralized government, often a dictatorship, with strong control over social and economic aspects, and which forcefully supresses opposition.

Let's now take the accepted definition of a Socialism. According to Merriam-Webster that's a political philosophy that advocates collective or state ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods.

Let's examine one of your Hitler quotes, "We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class." That would obviously fall under Socialism, because the government is supplying the distribution of goods necessary to maintain the healthy middle class. That would not fall under fascism unless it is satisfy the other requirements, namely "silencing the opposition" and valuing the nation or race over the individuals. If "maintaining a healthy middle class" means confiscating every profit you make that place your worth above what is considered "middle class" that would fascism because it would be valuing the "good of the nation" over your rightfully earned money.

Also, this really doesn't need to be said, but I suspect you might bring it up. Confiscating your profits that place you over the middle-class does not mean you can't b

where were you, when the term "Bushitler" was passed around?

Actually, that's the first time I've heard the term, so that may be a good question.

Face it, a mere allegation of any similarity with Hitler is a powerful assault and I don't remember much opposition to that before.

Valid similarities to Hitler's actions and policies are, of course, a powerful assault. Stuff like what you've posted are called "jokes." I won't bother to explain it, though...in the words of Saavik, "Humor. It is a difficult concept."

I have no idea why you didn't hear the opposition to comparisons of Bush with Hitler. They were there, and calls that the thread had been godwined were everywhere.

That's not to say that comparisons to Hitler are automatically invalid, but you need to justify the comparison with examples of the similar reprehensible actions. Not just any action that Hitler took, but the actions that caused him to be labeled "evil." Obviously Hitler took a shit every once in a while, but a comparison between you and Hitler because you also take a shit every once in a while doesn't tell anybody anything about what type of person you are. Other than admitting that Hitler was actually human, which is pretty offensive to the rest of us who are part of the same species, I suppose.

The point here was to simply remind, that Fascism and Socialism (whatever their merits) are no different from each other.

I know that's what you were trying to do, but my point was that not everything Hitler did or say was fascist or socialist just because he was pushing that agenda. So quoting him to make that point is an invalid argument.

In fact, Hitler's party was called "National Socialism Party". Thus pitching them as some sort of opposites is just that: a false dichotomy.

Oh please, that's called marketing. The Democratic Party call themselves democrats so the party can't POSSIBLY do anything undemocratic, huh? Google's motto is "do no evil" but that doesn't stop them from censoring web pages in China, right?

Well, honestly, what stronger evidence of something being Fascism can there be, than "Hitler said it"?

Ok, let me help you out. First, use the accepted definition of Fascism. According to Merriam-Webster dictionary, it is a political philosophy that places the nation and/or race above the individual, with a centralized government, often a dictatorship, with strong control over social and economic aspects, and which forcefully supresses opposition.

Let's now take the accepted definition of a Socialism. According to Merriam-Webster that's a political philosophy that advocates collective or state ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods.

Let's examine one of your Hitler quotes, "We demand the creation and maintenance of a healthy middle class." That would obviously fall under Socialism, because the government is supplying the distribution of goods necessary to maintain the healthy middle class. That would not fall under fascism unless it is satisfy the other requirements, namely "silencing the opposition" and valuing the nation or race over the individuals. If "maintaining a healthy middle class" means confiscating every profit you make that place your worth above what is considered "middle class" that would fascism because it would be valuing the "good of the nation" over your rightfully earned money.

Also, this really doesn't need to be said, but I suspect you might bring it up. Confiscating your profits that place you over the middle-class does not mean you can't b

...has motivated them to back-peddle...

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

(Yet another mind-expanding edition of Slashdot's Funniest Home-Oh-Phone Screwups, brought to you by Zontar The Mindless, who doesn't feel like giving away his /. account to the owner of the botnet to which this public terminal running Windows XP is almost certain to belong.)

...has motivated them to back-peddle...

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

(Yet another mind-expanding edition of Slashdot's Funniest Home-Oh-Phone Screwups, brought to you by Zontar The Mindless, who doesn't feel like giving away his /. account to the owner of the botnet to which this public terminal running Windows XP is almost certain to belong.)