Slashdot Mirror

Here's a dictionary link that actually contains a definition of the word "propaganda": link. From the link: "The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause."

This is exactly what political parties, editorialists, and activists do. Ralph Nader does it. Rush Limbaugh does it. Al Franken does it. They have been doing this for centuries. The First Amendment was written to protect such activity. What you call "propaganda" (speaking to advocate a cause) is necessary for democracy.

"but I admit I'm surprised to hear public radio"

It is one of my main reasons for opposing the return of this "doctrine". NPR talk stations have flourished in recent years because the doctrine is gone.

Actually, we have a word for that. Most people know it. You should probably check out that link; you don't want to seem ignorant when someone uses it in a sentence.

No extenuating circumstances ever, eh? Killing people is killing people? In the middle ages it was common practice to kill the young before a village was ransacked to keep them from being enslaved. It was believed that they would all go to heaven because they hadn't reached the age of accountability - when one is held accountable for ones own actions. So the village elders who did this out of love are as evil as Hitler?

What about abortion?
What about euthanasia?
What about accidental civilian casualties during peacetime?
Isn't there a difference between premeditated crimes and crimes of passion? Between accidents and deliberate acts?

I think intent is a bigger deal than you make it to be, and that the issue is more complicated than you say.

Meaning of the word performed

And that is why dictionaries exist...

recidivating

recidivate Audio pronunciation of "recidivating" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-sd-vt) intr.v. recidivated, recidivating, recidivates To return to a previous pattern of behavior, especially to return to criminal habits.

Solitare. It's the only game I care about.

...but obviously not enough to spell it correctly.

Am I the only one in this faded republic who knows what a speakeasy is?

Re: Why should they?
Spoken and written language is the basic form of human communication. Are any of your excuses justifiable? Apparently, you strive for mediocrity.

What excuses would those be ? You stated that geeks should have above average communication skills, I asked reasons for why this would be so. Never did I offer any excuses, nor are any neccessary, since, AFAIK, no one needs your approval for their communication skills or lack of them.

Re: IF... THEN... ELSE logic
Maybe if I compared it with "IF... THAN... ELSE" it would make it easier for you to understand.

Human languages, unlike computer ones, don't have a rigid syntax. This is because human beings have rather powerfull error correction algorithms in their disposal, so simple spelling errors don't usually form significant problems in understanding the meaning of the writing in question.

On the other hand, computers do not have such algorithms (known sometimes as "common sense"), and thus need every dot at exactly the right place; a computer trying to guess what its operator meant will likely guess wrong.

So no, comparison between these two different languages, made for completely different purposes, does not make things any clearer. Unless, of course, you are trying to imply that you are no better than a computer at parsing text ?

Re: "sexual matters"
Have you considered the word "fucking" can be used as an intensive?

Certainly. Have you considered that literalism can be used to annoy arrogant creeps like you ?

Take your mind out of the gutter, dickhead.

Um, I'm not the one using expletives derived from sexual acts and organs here.

Re: "impossible for everyone to have above average skills"
Geeks are meant to have above average skills.

From http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=geek:

1. a. A person regarded as foolish, inept, or clumsy.
   b. A person who is single-minded or accomplished in scientific or technical pursuits but is felt to be socially inept.
2. A carnival performer whose show consists of bizarre acts, such as biting the head off a live chicken.

Now, unless you meant the carnival performer with "geek", I'd say my point (which was that geeks don't need to have above average communication skills to be geeks) is proven, since communication is propably the most important social skill.

Can you please highlight where I had referred to all average people needing above average skills?

Certainly. You established the context of referring to all the people when you said (emphasis mine):

"I am going to take this opportunity to say to all the people who make mistakes like this "...

After this, you continued with:

"If you cannot spell very well and/or often cannot use correct grammar then you are just fucking ignorant and you need to recognize this fact. You lack basic knowledge and for it you should have "I am ignorant" stamped on your forehead daily until you at least achieve above average communication abilities."

Since you had specified "all the people who make mistakes like this" (which, since all people make mistakes sometimes, equals "all people") as context earlier, your second sentence referred to the same group. The end result of this was that you said that all the people need above average communication abilities, to avoid a stamp saying "I am ignorant" on their forehead, restamped daily.

Between these two quotes, you also said:

"Hemos is meant to be amongst the king of geeks, operating Slashdot and all. Maybe Slashdot should be News For Dumbass Illiterate Nerds instead."

However, there doesn't seem to be any obvious

no, he misspelt "misspelt".

Bzzzt!!! Wrong!

Man, you really are dumb. Maybe thats why you don't have a job, and spend all day posting on Slashdot unlike the rest of us.

Learn how to spell "noone" is not a word! It's not even a compound word. Correct spelling: No One

You were baited by an obvious post crafted to get your goat. That's being trolled. I was not baited by a similar post, but the intention was there. Trolling refers to a fishing term...putting lines out and hoping for a bite. link

Misplaced sarcasm and quips are often used by "trolls". Subtlety is no bar to entry.

a CHORD!

You should be sure that you're on solid ground before casting dispersions on both the usage and punctuation of another person's sentence. Using "Hopefully" is fine, per the explanation noted within this link. Unless, of course, you're a critic.

As for the remainder of the sentence, which part is wrong? Are suggesting the commas should appear outside the quotes? Otherwise, it's a complete sentence with both a prepositional and a dependent clause.

You're thinking microeconomically.

I am not thinking at the level of the individual person or firm (that is what microeconomics means), but of the US economy as a whole (which does fall into the scope of macroeconomics - if you though macroeconomics means international trade only, you're mistaken). Do those points not apply? Basically the US pays itself more than it's worth.

And where did I mention causing the dollar to fall? Improving the balance of trade tends to do the opposite, or so classical economic theory states.

I think you meant "coincidentally", not "ironically".

I think you meant "coincidentally", not "ironically".

but it really did seem to peak interest

the word you're looking for is "pique"

1. Biology. A small mass of protoplasm or cells from which a new organism or one of its parts may develop.
2. The earliest form of an organism; a seed, bud, or spore.
3. A microorganism, especially a pathogen.
4. Something that may serve as the basis of further growth or development: the germ of a project.

see definition #4 Something that may serve as the basis of further growth or development: the germ of a project.

Congratulations, slashbot. You failed to read the post you to which you are responding.

I fail to see exactly how calling them something other than "concentration camps" is minimizing the situation

Euphemism. If you need to mince words to to prop up your insecurities, fine. Just don't ask me to sacrifice meanings so you won't feel uncomfortable.

And if your argument is "We weren't as bad as the Nazis", then don't expect me to take you seriously.

perhaps an incorrect triplicate story should be referred to, appropriately, as "tripe".

How do you even pronounce 'pwn3d'?

"3", of course, is "e". Since "pwned" came from "owned", the most sensible pronunciation is to rhyme the two: "powned." I supposed "pooned" is acceptable, since the only two English-accepted words that use "w" as a vowel, "cwm" and "crwth", are pronounced with an "oo" vowel.

But "pwned" is obviously not a Welsh word. So "powned" may be preferable.

How do you even pronounce 'pwn3d'?

"3", of course, is "e". Since "pwned" came from "owned", the most sensible pronunciation is to rhyme the two: "powned." I supposed "pooned" is acceptable, since the only two English-accepted words that use "w" as a vowel, "cwm" and "crwth", are pronounced with an "oo" vowel.

But "pwned" is obviously not a Welsh word. So "powned" may be preferable.

I wouldn't be surprised if Homeland Security Operations Morning Briefs [cryptome.org] that we leaked are also part of their inclination to avoid digital record keeping (and comprehensive FOIA searches)

These reports show an interesting view of the domestic intelligence gathering being done at the DHS.

I've read a few pages of these reports. This is mundane information about security incidents (suspicious behavior, bomb threats, security rules violations etc.) which are from what I saw mostly handled by the police. Sometimes there is some information about more grave incidents from abroad (like the guy in Norway who attacked the flight crew with an axe). Nothing suspicious here, just reports about security people of various type doing their job on a daily basis.

And certainly no intelligence - maybe I didn't read enough but I didn't find anything there that could be described as intelligence information or intelligence gathering - reports about suspicious behavior are not intelligence. Reports about aircraft crashes or bomb threats are not intelligence. Reports about security regulations violations (the guy with a knife in this hair gel in his carry-on bag) are not intelligence.

There are plenty of meanings for a non-regular-slashdotter such as:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=dupe
And http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dup e&defid=799405

This link might explain things to you: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sarcasm.

At least they could spell "pulled".

I could see pooled [dictionary.com], except it really doesn't fucking fit.

Thanks for playing. You're retarded.

Both are acceptable spellings.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vulcanism

religion
n.

1.
a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.
2. The life or condition of a person in a religious order.
3. A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.
4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

*smirk*

Wallah

Learn how to spell "noone" is not a word idiot! It's not even a compound word. Correct spelling: No One

It's a simple fallacy: confusing the largest portion with a greater-than-half portion (it doesn't help that the dictionary definition for simple majority includes both*). This often pisses voters off in politics---ex, some guy gets into office with 45% of votes, because 30% of votes went to someone else, and 25% of votes went to a third person.

* = I'd love to know what "official" definitions of this term exist. Some Googling seemed to show that both *definitions* are used by voting systems.

Well to be pedantic, "pedantic" isn't a synonym for "contrarian". You should know what the big words mean before you use them.

Well to be pedantic, "pedantic" isn't a synonym for "contrarian". You should know what the big words mean before you use them.

Idiot submitter, don't you know know the difference between waist (that large circumferenced middle section of your nerd-body) and waste (what you are to both air and space)?

I'll bet you type "loose" when you really mean "lose", too.

Fuck you and all your ilk.

Idiot submitter, don't you know know the difference between waist (that large circumferenced middle section of your nerd-body) and waste (what you are to both air and space)?

I'll bet you type "loose" when you really mean "lose", too.

Fuck you and all your ilk.

By definition, if you truly have faith, you don't doubt it.

Really?

Anyway. I don't "doubt" it but at the same time I'm not such an arrogant ass to think that enforcing my religion at gun point is an effective way of "spreading the word". Tolerance is the basis of every world religion. I also accept the idea of potential human failure to not recognize the truth.

See here for what it means unless you are too niggardly in developing your knowledge of the real meaning of the term.

I really should be helpful instead of just being an ass...

braking
breaking

I really should be helpful instead of just being an ass...

braking
breaking

"Name like that"?

Have you never heard of the many many other things which use the word Xanadu?

Please see liberal and conservative. This is exactly what those words used to mean. Then Rush and GOPAC started the current culture war and seemed to succeed in redefining liberal and conservative. What is most funny is the Newt really was a liberal, since he wanted to make radical changes to the government.

I've always considered myself a progressive (although I prefer bleading heart libertarian). Thankfully no one has tried to change that definition.

Please see liberal and conservative. This is exactly what those words used to mean. Then Rush and GOPAC started the current culture war and seemed to succeed in redefining liberal and conservative. What is most funny is the Newt really was a liberal, since he wanted to make radical changes to the government.

I've always considered myself a progressive (although I prefer bleading heart libertarian). Thankfully no one has tried to change that definition.

why not add the support to chase after the niche market?

I made this a bit clearer in another post in this thread - because they don't need to - yet. If Apple finds itself under threat - dwindling market share, etc. - then they can go to their reserve of such features and add them in, thus making the iPod more attractive versus its competitors once again.

It's hideously capitalistic, perhaps, but it's the way the game works.

Oh, and one more thing, it's 'niche,' not 'nitch', despite the interesting way you guys pronounce it. :P

iqu :D

I nearly fell out of my chair reading that...too funny.

Good point though...Linux is per se a legacy platform, even though it has benefitted from lots of technological advancements.

One other thing I'd like to point out: there are no "risk adverse" organizations. The phrase the original poster was looking for is "risk averse".

See definition of averse.

If you're going to use a word. Know what it means.

Dictionary.com definition of propoganda:
1. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those advocating such a doctrine or cause.

So are Moore's movies propoganda? Yes. Anti-drug and tobacco commercials on the television? Yes. Rush Limbaugh? Yes.

(FWIW, I have never seen a Michael Moore film.)

Actually, my religion can't be debunked by any theory, in that my religion is non-comittal. I specifically said in that post that "the parent, however, didn't say anything about the origin of life,". I didn't say that it's how life was created, but he's right in that evolution is observable.

On another note, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously.

#1. "Adaptation is NOT evolution." adaptation: Biology. An alteration or adjustment in structure or habits, often hereditary, by which a species or individual improves its condition in relationship to its environment.
Apparently you do not understand the biolgical definition of "adaptation." An adaptation is some change an organism has made to fit it's environment. It's not a process. It's caused by the process "natural selection" which is the mechanism for evolution.

Adaptation, evolution, and natural selection are not several distinct phenomena, like you seem to think. You're mistaking "evolution" for the term "macro-evolution" which involves speciation. Evolution does not have to create new species to be evolution.

Also, about us "never absolutely seen the emergence of a new species"... good job, idiot. I found that all in about 2 minutes. Not that I didn't already know you were wrong, I'm just saying, do a little research before you make these ridiculous claims.

As well as us not being sure what a species is, what the hell are you talking about? Biology. A fundamental category of taxonomic classification, ranking below a genus or subgenus and consisting of related organisms capable of interbreeding. I think we're pretty sure what a species is. Even given various exceptions, it's not like we can't tell what's in a species with ease.

Not to mention the fact that it doesn't matter, as evolution does not have to entail speciation, as you wrongly believe.

And about whatever the Bible says: that's great! I don't care! Didn't I just say to leave your religion out of this? This has nothing to do with the Bible, or the origin of life for that matter.

It just has to do with my point, and the point of the original parent that evolution is observable and going on right now. It is. Accept it. Your religion will not come crashing to its feet, I promise, just stop making these ridiculous claims.

Actually, my religion can't be debunked by any theory, in that my religion is non-comittal. I specifically said in that post that "the parent, however, didn't say anything about the origin of life,". I didn't say that it's how life was created, but he's right in that evolution is observable.

On another note, you obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Seriously.

#1. "Adaptation is NOT evolution." adaptation: Biology. An alteration or adjustment in structure or habits, often hereditary, by which a species or individual improves its condition in relationship to its environment.
Apparently you do not understand the biolgical definition of "adaptation." An adaptation is some change an organism has made to fit it's environment. It's not a process. It's caused by the process "natural selection" which is the mechanism for evolution.

Adaptation, evolution, and natural selection are not several distinct phenomena, like you seem to think. You're mistaking "evolution" for the term "macro-evolution" which involves speciation. Evolution does not have to create new species to be evolution.

Also, about us "never absolutely seen the emergence of a new species"... good job, idiot. I found that all in about 2 minutes. Not that I didn't already know you were wrong, I'm just saying, do a little research before you make these ridiculous claims.

As well as us not being sure what a species is, what the hell are you talking about? Biology. A fundamental category of taxonomic classification, ranking below a genus or subgenus and consisting of related organisms capable of interbreeding. I think we're pretty sure what a species is. Even given various exceptions, it's not like we can't tell what's in a species with ease.

Not to mention the fact that it doesn't matter, as evolution does not have to entail speciation, as you wrongly believe.

And about whatever the Bible says: that's great! I don't care! Didn't I just say to leave your religion out of this? This has nothing to do with the Bible, or the origin of life for that matter.

It just has to do with my point, and the point of the original parent that evolution is observable and going on right now. It is. Accept it. Your religion will not come crashing to its feet, I promise, just stop making these ridiculous claims.