Slashdot Mirror

It seems to me you are contradicting yourself.

Instinctive means prompted by impusle, spontaneous and unthinking, not reason. While instinctive behavior might be considered "natural", "natural" is not the same as "rational", especially not in "economically rational" (or maybe I should say "cost-rational").

touché interj.

Used to acknowledge a hit in fencing or a successful criticism or an effective point in argument.

I appreciate the sentiment of your post but I don't really think you outlined anything resembling a viable campaign strategy.

What, you think that was supposed to be a dissertation for a Ph.D in political science? I threw out a list of five off-the-cuff hypotheticals and they should be treated as such, not over-analyzed by someone badly in need of a bag of prunes. :)

Don't think that is a viable issue for a Democrat to run on. Only people that care are those in the miliary and their families.

Attack the enemies strengths, Karl Rove has been doing that with great success for years. Republicans have been claiming that they are the best when it comes to national security, and we've got to stop letting them get away with it. If Republicans are so hyped up on the military and "support our troops" rehtoric, then why did soldiers not have enough armor in Iraq and what are wounded veterans doing paying for their own meals in military hospitals? You don't have to change everyone's minds; just swing enough voters to make a difference or create enough doubts in the minds of Republican voters that they stay home on election day. I would certainaly think that the "fib factor" smear campaign on Gore in 2000 certainaly caused enough doubt in the minds of at least 1% of the voters, and in these days an extra 1% might be all you need.

Well I'll give you that spending it on infrastructure is better than wasting it in Iraq but your not going to win a lot of votes with it. First off its socialism

No it's not. Not going to win any votes? It would create thousands of jobs.

money is mostly going to disappear in to the pockets of corrupt construction companies, unionized labor, and mafia controlled concrete companies.

And your basis for this statement is...? This could be done like any standard project - seek bids, select the best offer, then sign a contract that provides for an incentive to finish ahead of schedule and under budget, and penalties if they are late and do a shoddy job.

When all the money was gone you would be skewered for all the fraud, waste and abuse just like the "Big Dig" was.

Yes, everyone likes to knock the Big Dig. What they don't like to do is mention how the project kept being expanded again and again.

Easy to say, nearly impossible to do. Terrorists and insurgents always have the advantage because they can pick the soft spots.

Impossible? Only if you're trying to make security foolproof, which no one is saying. You go after the easiest ways for terrorists to kill people and go to work on it; Playboy had a nice article on this very subject a year or two ago. One example: securing chlorine tanker trucks at water treatment plants. The gas is lethal at up to 20 miles away and clings to the ground, dispersing slowly. Terrorists could wait for a windy day in NYC, and blow up a truck on the windward side of Manhattan.

Part of the problem is it is nearly impossible to form a viable platform on the center-left. Anything you do to please the left is going to alienate the center and vice versa. The Republicans dont have that problem. As long as they are pro guns, pro life, pro religion and anti gay they have a huge and solid block of people who vote solely on those issues and care about nothing else. They then just have to whittle away some additional votes from the center and they can do that easily with scare tactics on things like national security.

Well said. Democrats have a reliable base of support with minorities, feminists and unions, but relying on them to battle the God-gun nut jihad just doens't cut the mustard. The Democratic party needs to get out of it's rut, find new issues to talk about and start chipping away at those Republican voting blocks, like asking where in all this "marriage protection" rehtoric are proposals to reduce divorce, and point out that Bush said he would sign a renewed assualt weapons ban.

Did you also notice that water was wet?

Accure?

Quited?

understudy.

See here and here, then do not post on /. for one year or until you are no longer a moron, whichever comes second.

Or perhaps it does: Bastardising English

The daily show isn't offensive it's irrevrant.

That would be irreverent . If you're going to bold a word, it's probably a good idea to check the spelling. For a minute there, I thought you were saying the Daily Show is irrelevant, which I don't believe for a minute. :)

You're all morans.

No, I live in New Jersey. The Morans live in Kansas, Missouri, Texas, and Wyoming.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=moran

>> Serirously- this isn't paperclips these people are selling ITS YOUR
>> PERSONAL DATA. They need to be closed, and whoever responsible needs to go
>> to jail- and everyone involved in covering up the crime deserves to live in
>> poverty for the rest of their fucking lives.
>
> Nice thought, but Dubya would pardon them.

Then he also deserves the same fate.

The president of a democratic country is not an overlord. He is chosen by the people to administer the execution of of the people's will. Once he forgets that, he needs to be slapped down. Hard.

> Irregardless of the various culprits [...]

Irregardless?

> Anyway, as I noted in the earlier thread on this topic, I think we need to
> establish the principle that *YOU* own the personal data about *YOU*, and no
> one can use it or sell it without *YOUR* permission. This is actually a
> logical implication of the Fifth and Sixth Amendments. However, to give it
> teeth, I think we also need to appeal to "Possession is nine points of the
> law", and *YOU* should be able to store your own data on *YOUR* own computer.
> Anyone wants to see it, they ask for your permission (or prove they deserve a
> search warrant).

Hmmm...

You said: "... ChoicePoint helped disenfranchise thousands of primarily Democratic voters".

I am sorry but, according to your suggestion, this information does not belong to you so you cannot use it without a search warrant.

Yes, this remark was facetious but there is a line to be drawn between a right to privacy and the freedom of speech (or information) and it is not so simple to decide where to draw it.

It's actually Moron

I did wonder how long the "Microsoft Inc Bad, Google Inc Good" pastiche could last.

"You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means."

Actually, I have no idea what you're even confusing it with.

Man I love how people who are so absolutely wrong get modded up.

Co2 is in no way, shape or form Toxic.

The effect he describes is life saving, not toxic.

Get some perspective...sheesh.

"I was merely illustrating (by means of analogy) that intentionally causing a problem is not the same as failing to solve one.". Not so hard, eh?

okay is in the dictionary because it is a word that is in common usage.

virii is not in the dictionary, because it is not a word at all, it is a misspelling.

Go to college and take Introductory Linguistics and you'll find out why language falls apart when people go around making up their own words.

okay is in the dictionary because it is a word that is in common usage.

virii is not in the dictionary, because it is not a word at all, it is a misspelling.

Go to college and take Introductory Linguistics and you'll find out why language falls apart when people go around making up their own words.

I do believe you are blatantly wrong on both counts. I am fairly certain that most states have some kind of "Good Samaritan" law that requires you to help

Now, IANALE, but I know how to use Google and I found this one from Tennessee and this one from Oklahoma and many more pretty much along the same lines.

That being said, Microsoft is not watching people burn

And lastly, who modded you "Insightful"? "Interesting", maybe, but not "Insightful".

And your post which was factually incorrect is considered "informative". Go figure.

I do believe you are blatantly wrong on both counts. I am fairly certain that most states have some kind of "Good Samaritan" law that requires you to help

Now, IANALE, but I know how to use Google and I found this one from Tennessee and this one from Oklahoma and many more pretty much along the same lines.

That being said, Microsoft is not watching people burn

And lastly, who modded you "Insightful"? "Interesting", maybe, but not "Insightful".

And your post which was factually incorrect is considered "informative". Go figure.

There is indeed such a word as burglarize, and "burgle" has been relegated to a mere synonym.

There is indeed such a word as burglarize, and "burgle" has been relegated to a mere synonym.

Much as I hate it, burglarize is an accepted term in the US.

It is spelled "cleavage."

Geeks have the same rights to a spathic presenter as anyone.

... and probably more need.

I wasn't sure about the usage myself, I admit. However Dictionary.com agrees with me, which argues for common usage at the very least.

pedagogue? I think you mean demagogue.

In practice, people use the term "percentage" to mean parts-in-100 OR a fraction

Numerically, it only means one thing: "fraction or ratio with 100 understood as the denominator". If you are using it in any other way, you are using it incorrectly.

The fact that colloquially people confuse the two sometimes is no excuse. Colloquially, people also confuse "power", "strength", and "force", but as an engineer, you better keep them straight; that's part of your job.

Look at the second definition listed in the dictionary. It's a "part of a whole."

Yes, but not as a numerical value.

Nobody ever implied that the number has any statistical validity, it is just a number which happens to do a fairly good job at helping people compare things. If it's useful to you, use it. If not, don't.

So, you agree then: the maintainability index is bullshit because nobody has established that it actually tells us anything about the maintainability of software. It simply is a number that everybody can determine for themselves whether they find useful.

Of course, that means that the paper we are talking about has no significance: since its measure of maintainability has not been validated, we can draw no conclusions about the maintainability of OSS from the MI.

COWBOYNEAL: BLACKMAIL!
Inigo Montoya: You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

u that jesus dude??? wehn did u cum back here???? i taught you wehre dead or somthing lol. vein vein vein vein vein. lollerskatesz.

Actually, you've got it wrong. Principal = school head master Principle address = main address

Actually, you've got it wrong. Principal = school head master Principle address = main address

Original post was a joke.

Yeah, that's called computrons. I have them too.
People are around computers for long enough generate them. I once saw a guy pull an Amiga out of a Guru Mediation error. It was impressive.

Dictionary reference for a computron

The world would be a better and cheaper place if every cat owner adopted a feral cat instead of a custom-engineered or purebred one.

The world would be a better and cheaper place if people would F@KSDing spade and neuter their cats (which if you check you're link, is what they recommend...), then there wouldn't BE a feral cat problem. Personally, I think it should be illegal to own a pet that isn't fixed without a breeders license.

Oh, and feral cat's are scary. In case you don't know, they are in fact feral. Yes, it would be great if more people adopted them, but most people aren't capable of caring for feral animals. I've seen so many abused and neglected animals returned repeatedly to the shelter because they didn't get along with the other pets or, even once, "didn't match the furniture," and most of these animals were quite tame and docile. I just don't think the average person could handle a feral cat, unfortunately.

For the people reading this, let me first point out the parents obvious bias. Such as, notice there are no ipod -s? How about napster +s? Nope, none. Anyway, let me help the browsers distinguish between opinions and facts:

+Huge install base
Huge compared to what? My ass?

+Awesome selection of music - could be better, but it absolutely blows away anything shy of Amazon, and terrestrial stores can't hold a candle to it.
Sounds like an opinion to me. Obviously, no store outside of those two will ever match his itune fantasy world.

+Widely considered the best portable player made
Another opinion.

+DRM is fairly transparent and can easily be legally circumvented, and even more easily, well... *cough*
Legally? Really? I doubt it. Besides, read a bit up about the guy who tried to get his songs from itunes after he lost them. They probably won't redownload your songs you've already paid for! In short, a "modified truth" if you will.

-Let's face it: iTMS is a fantastic idea, but about as much of a cludgy resource whore as a dolled-up media player can be
It's kludge, or kluge:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=kluge
Nonetheless, I see another opinion poking through here.

Napster:

+Has the Napster name, which may mean something to someone that's been living in a cave for the past 4 years, but probably not Another opinion.

-Absolutely craptastic selection of music
I doubt the parent has even looked at the selection. Surely he's not trying to decided which type of music you like for you?

-WMA files aren't any more widely supported by the portable market than AAC, who are they trying to kid? Sure, more player models support WMA, but take away the ones that aren't even remotely competetive with the iPod and the iPod mini, and all you're really left with is the iRiver HP-120 and the Creative Zen Micro. FUD. Opinion. Shop around, the Creative and iRiver can be good products.

-Their DRM scheme is geared more towards music rental than music purchase.
He might be right on this one, depends on how long you're looking to keep your music.

So... what "advantages" are Napster touting, again?
Well, if you got off your fantasy world and objectively considered things, you might find them. However, like most appleboys, there's no help for you, the disease has already metastasized .

First I have to say that I do not agree at all with what the MPAA is doing, but I must comment on the absurdity of people drawing conclusions of things by looking at a single definition or example. You are claiming, or at least implying, that theft is not occuring because you are not "removing" the file. So let's take a second to go back to Webster and look at their definition for the word remove.

remove:

1.To move from a place or position occupied: removed the cups from the table.
2.To transfer or convey from one place to another: removed the family to Texas.
3.To take off: removed my boots.
4.To take away; withdraw: removed the candidate's name from consideration.
5.To do away with; eliminate: remove a stain.
6.To dismiss from an office or position.

Once again, I am not trying to make any conclusions as to what theft is, but just trying to point out how relying on a defition all by itself to make some conclusion is ludicrous.
This is just my 2 cents though.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=octopus
American Heritage Dictionary at the top of the page claims it comes more immediately from New Latin. Merriam-Webster concurs. You can step back further to Greek or Indo-European mother tongue for the etymology, but the pluralization ought to be based on the most immediate source, or on standard English pluralization.

Good ol' dictionary.com does list "octopods", but that seems like a generic term for any eight-legged creature, not incorrect for an octopus but not specific either.

(Mostly OT anecdote: When my older sister first called to announce her engagement to a quadriplegic, my mother, startled, turned to the rest of us and announced, "Nancy's going to marry a quadraped!"

(We speculated furiously until she hung up and explained-- a dog, perhaps? Horse? Wombat?)

last time I checked, the plural of "octopus" was "octopi", right?

That's the first thing I thought when I saw that. Surprised to see it in a National Geographic article too. So I checked and it turns out both work....

Or pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis?

Gotta open up those possibilities.

millennia

...no.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=hilarious Look up the spelling of hilarious, then correct people just to be annoying

No, not at all.

Irony, courtesy of dictionary.com

That's an interesting word.

Extradition.

I got my law degree from Dick Wolf University.

N/A - Not Applicable not (conveniently assumed to be) Not Available Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=NA

Oh sure.

hate to be a pedant,

So why are you ?

And, to be pedantic, sentences really should be started with a capital letter.

but you can't "breath" air at all,

Quick ! Call an ambulance !

as breath is a noun, not a verb.

Actually, it's both. From http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=breath:

1. The air inhaled and exhaled in respiration.
2. The act or process of breathing; respiration.

They're not trying to force religion on you! Next you'll be slamming someone for saying "'bye" because it's derived from "God be with you"...