Slashdot Mirror

Google may develop an online currency -- 'Googles,' if you like (http://www.emarketer.com/news/article.php?1002736 ).

Given that dictionary.com defines spot as an informal term for "a piece of paper money worth a specified number of dollars," I suggest there is no way Google will be able to prevent people from calling them "gSpots."

Presumably the same planet as those wacky folks at dictionary.com.

A displaying of facts does not have to suggest that one thing or another is valid, it is merely describing how something works and why it is used.

Moving on, happiness == success not success ==happiness. You totally read it backwards or I displayed it backwards, in either case I will clarify. For some people they are happy being a doctor saving lives, others are happy being an automechanic. These people I consider successful. Take my sister, she is happy being a full time mom, she too is successful. This is how I see the purpose of education.

You are right that a man cannot be judged based on his job. In the course of a year I did landscaping, trash removal, fill hotels with all new furniture, cabled hotels, installed networks at the hotels and local schools among several others places. Oh yeah, I was also spending vast hours of my day with my niece, teaching her how to crawl, exposing her to music and other forms of active stimulus. So I agree with you there. That doesn't mean it doesn't play a small role in helping define a person.

A displaying of facts does not have to suggest that one thing or another is valid, it is merely describing how something works and why it is used.

Moving on, happiness == success not success ==happiness. You totally read it backwards or I displayed it backwards, in either case I will clarify. For some people they are happy being a doctor saving lives, others are happy being an automechanic. These people I consider successful. Take my sister, she is happy being a full time mom, she too is successful. This is how I see the purpose of education.

You are right that a man cannot be judged based on his job. In the course of a year I did landscaping, trash removal, fill hotels with all new furniture, cabled hotels, installed networks at the hotels and local schools among several others places. Oh yeah, I was also spending vast hours of my day with my niece, teaching her how to crawl, exposing her to music and other forms of active stimulus. So I agree with you there. That doesn't mean it doesn't play a small role in helping define a person.

censor - To examine and expurgate.

expurgate - To remove erroneous, vulgar, obscene, or otherwise objectionable material from (a book, for example) before publication.

censor - To examine and expurgate.

expurgate - To remove erroneous, vulgar, obscene, or otherwise objectionable material from (a book, for example) before publication.

Is there any irony in the acronym made by the new "Microsoft Authorized Refurbisher"? I've always known that Windows mar's my computer, but how nice of M$ to admit it.

Yeah, yeah... flamebait... troll... I know, I know, but the obviousness of the implied acronyn was just too much to pass up.

The only thing necessary for Micro$oft to triumph is for a few good programmers to do nothing". North County Computers

Nope. Sorry, you are wrong, would you like to try again?

A Fascist govt. puts the state first. A Socialist govt. puts the citizens first. Nazi germany was a fascist society (no matter what the party name was...this is often a ploy to invoke public trust). Another classic fascist definition involves blending corperate power with the government (Such as Germany and Italy around WWII). With socialism there is no 'real' corperation...only the government supplied products.

A fascist society takes nationalism to the extreme.

http://www.zeppscommentaries.com/Politics/fascism. htm
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fascism

How about you actually *learn* history instead of claiming to know it.

History lesson: The American Rebublican Party *used* to be considered socialist and very liberal. Now they are on the other end of the spectrum.

People call Republicans fascists because they put the government before the people more often than the democrats. Also the fact that fascist people are generally racist and many Republicans fall toward that category... Democrates generally advocate equallity.

Oh, and another history lesson...republicans ALSO voted against the 2001 tax cuts. Interesting, huh? Not really, you always have people crossing party lines on this stuff.

Wrong. You're thinking of a similar word:

CENSURE

Actually, pornography can just be lurid or sensational material.

• I thought the metaphor fits. It was also on topic and a witty quote.

Now, if you'd said anecdotal evidence rather than empirical, I might agree with you...

SB

Now, if you'd said anecdotal evidence rather than empirical, I might agree with you...

SB

Are you kidding? I mean, If I'm reading an article, and I see part of it highlighted as a link - I'm going to assume its going to be more content for the story I am reading, maybe adding a deeper explaination or background to whatever phrase is highlighted. If I am seriously studying a story, and follow a link to somehting like "air saferty", I want to see an article on air safety, not some page with 100 flashing banner ads trying to convince me that i need to buy a 'terrorist detector 2000' for only 29.95.

The only way that I could ever see this justified AT ALL, and i still think its not cool, would be that Every ad linkd from the story is labelled "AD" somehow - either by bracketed text, or maybe the link being a different colour from normal links.

I find it very hard to see any way that this isn't a bad thing. I think it could turn in to a very bad think.

Remember - Adverts were first picked up by old paper media as a way to support the actual journalism - It would cover the costs to create and deliver the content. Now it seems we're getting closer and closer to the content being made to deliver the adverts. How long until articles are being changed to fit in certain key words from advertisers? Scary.

Are you kidding? I mean, If I'm reading an article, and I see part of it highlighted as a link - I'm going to assume its going to be more content for the story I am reading, maybe adding a deeper explaination or background to whatever phrase is highlighted. If I am seriously studying a story, and follow a link to somehting like "air saferty", I want to see an article on air safety, not some page with 100 flashing banner ads trying to convince me that i need to buy a 'terrorist detector 2000' for only 29.95.

The only way that I could ever see this justified AT ALL, and i still think its not cool, would be that Every ad linkd from the story is labelled "AD" somehow - either by bracketed text, or maybe the link being a different colour from normal links.

I find it very hard to see any way that this isn't a bad thing. I think it could turn in to a very bad think.

Remember - Adverts were first picked up by old paper media as a way to support the actual journalism - It would cover the costs to create and deliver the content. Now it seems we're getting closer and closer to the content being made to deliver the adverts. How long until articles are being changed to fit in certain key words from advertisers? Scary.

Are you kidding? I mean, If I'm reading an article, and I see part of it highlighted as a link - I'm going to assume its going to be more content for the story I am reading, maybe adding a deeper explaination or background to whatever phrase is highlighted. If I am seriously studying a story, and follow a link to somehting like "air saferty", I want to see an article on air safety, not some page with 100 flashing banner ads trying to convince me that i need to buy a 'terrorist detector 2000' for only 29.95.

The only way that I could ever see this justified AT ALL, and i still think its not cool, would be that Every ad linkd from the story is labelled "AD" somehow - either by bracketed text, or maybe the link being a different colour from normal links.

I find it very hard to see any way that this isn't a bad thing. I think it could turn in to a very bad think.

Remember - Adverts were first picked up by old paper media as a way to support the actual journalism - It would cover the costs to create and deliver the content. Now it seems we're getting closer and closer to the content being made to deliver the adverts. How long until articles are being changed to fit in certain key words from advertisers? Scary.

Are you kidding? I mean, If I'm reading an article, and I see part of it highlighted as a link - I'm going to assume its going to be more content for the story I am reading, maybe adding a deeper explaination or background to whatever phrase is highlighted. If I am seriously studying a story, and follow a link to somehting like "air saferty", I want to see an article on air safety, not some page with 100 flashing banner ads trying to convince me that i need to buy a 'terrorist detector 2000' for only 29.95.

The only way that I could ever see this justified AT ALL, and i still think its not cool, would be that Every ad linkd from the story is labelled "AD" somehow - either by bracketed text, or maybe the link being a different colour from normal links.

I find it very hard to see any way that this isn't a bad thing. I think it could turn in to a very bad think.

Remember - Adverts were first picked up by old paper media as a way to support the actual journalism - It would cover the costs to create and deliver the content. Now it seems we're getting closer and closer to the content being made to deliver the adverts. How long until articles are being changed to fit in certain key words from advertisers? Scary.

Are you kidding? I mean, If I'm reading an article, and I see part of it highlighted as a link - I'm going to assume its going to be more content for the story I am reading, maybe adding a deeper explaination or background to whatever phrase is highlighted. If I am seriously studying a story, and follow a link to somehting like "air saferty", I want to see an article on air safety, not some page with 100 flashing banner ads trying to convince me that i need to buy a 'terrorist detector 2000' for only 29.95.

The only way that I could ever see this justified AT ALL, and i still think its not cool, would be that Every ad linkd from the story is labelled "AD" somehow - either by bracketed text, or maybe the link being a different colour from normal links.

I find it very hard to see any way that this isn't a bad thing. I think it could turn in to a very bad think.

Remember - Adverts were first picked up by old paper media as a way to support the actual journalism - It would cover the costs to create and deliver the content. Now it seems we're getting closer and closer to the content being made to deliver the adverts. How long until articles are being changed to fit in certain key words from advertisers? Scary.

I'm hardly a linux zealot, I'm just saying that it's best to not think too hard about what's going on over at Channel9 since it's obvious right from the get-go that there's either (a) an overabundance of cluelessness (they've chosen a presentation format they aren't aware isn't available to everyone) or (b) there's a low-grade hostility already present toward anyone who isn't already a windows user. (Meaning they really don't want to hear from anyone who isn't using windows by making a website that can only be viewed properly while using Windows).

Okay, I'll be fair. Maybe I am a zealot. After all, I took one look at the site, saw huge empty squares all over it that were meant to be the content, realized that I'd need to go get a different operating system to properly view the content and decided they probably weren't interested in what I had to say. Yep, that probably makes me a fanatically committed person.

"Accordint to the structuralist theory of language and society, you cannot copy the former without copying the latter...."

Along those lines, it would be easy for the participants to use chimp-like behavior yet still encode Human language, similar to charades where non-verbal actions refer to language concepts.

In a word, yes, but headline has been changed to stop inevitable 50-post grammar dissection (or.. has it?)

Yeah, those indian givers.

Does not say "and plugs into a particular global network"

They wanted me to add payment protection and some other insurance options. I said that I would like to wave those options. He seemed confused by my response, and asked what I meant by waving those options

Wave the options? Wave (synonyms: wag, waggle, undulate) them like a hand-held fan to cool him off?

Perhaps he was confused that you didn't want to forgo* any additional services and waive (synonyms: relinquish, dispense with) those options?

* or forego, both spellings are accepted.

They wanted me to add payment protection and some other insurance options. I said that I would like to wave those options. He seemed confused by my response, and asked what I meant by waving those options

Wave the options? Wave (synonyms: wag, waggle, undulate) them like a hand-held fan to cool him off?

Perhaps he was confused that you didn't want to forgo* any additional services and waive (synonyms: relinquish, dispense with) those options?

* or forego, both spellings are accepted.

Maybe English isn't your first language either?

Lackadaisical (adj.) - 1) Lacking spirit, liveliness, or interest; languid: "There'll be no time to correct lackadaisical driving techniques after trouble develops" (William J. Hampton). 2) Affectedly pensive; languidly sentimental.

And now thanks to SCO and the RedHat lawsuit (page 5) referenced by the Groklaw article we might see an expansion of the definition for lawyers and geeks alike...

3) Lacking urgency and passionate conviction: "[SCO is] ... taking a lackadaisical attitude toward pursuing its claims."

\Joke\, n. [L. jocus. Cf Jeopardy, Jocular, Juggler.] 1. Something said for the sake of exciting a laugh; something witty or sportive (commonly indicating more of hilarity or humor than jest); a jest; a witticism; as, to crack good-natured jokes.

\Sar"casm\, n. [F. sarcasme, L. sarcasmus, Gr. sarkasmo`s, from sarka`zein to tear flesh like dogs, to bite the lips in rage, to speak bitterly, to sneer, fr. sa`rx, sa`rkos, flesh.] A keen, reproachful expression; a satirical remark uttered with some degree of scorn or contempt; a taunt; a gibe; a cutting jest.

Honestly, no, I didn't read the article. I figured a joke's a joke even if it didn't jive 100% with the article.

\Joke\, n. [L. jocus. Cf Jeopardy, Jocular, Juggler.] 1. Something said for the sake of exciting a laugh; something witty or sportive (commonly indicating more of hilarity or humor than jest); a jest; a witticism; as, to crack good-natured jokes.

\Sar"casm\, n. [F. sarcasme, L. sarcasmus, Gr. sarkasmo`s, from sarka`zein to tear flesh like dogs, to bite the lips in rage, to speak bitterly, to sneer, fr. sa`rx, sa`rkos, flesh.] A keen, reproachful expression; a satirical remark uttered with some degree of scorn or contempt; a taunt; a gibe; a cutting jest.

Honestly, no, I didn't read the article. I figured a joke's a joke even if it didn't jive 100% with the article.

Appendixes is an acceptable variant pluralization, and don't call me Shirley.

If only he had the power of the internet.

ok, like

v. liked, lik·ing, likes
v. tr.

1. To find pleasant or attractive; enjoy.
2. To want to have: would like some coffee.
3. To feel about; regard: How do you like her nerve!
4. Archaic. To be pleasing to.

v. intr.

1. To have an inclination or a preference: If you like, we can meet you there.
2. Scots. To be pleased.

n.

Something that is liked; a preference: made a list of his likes and dislikes.

not necessarily.

From reference.com:

vend v. vended, vending, vends
1. a. To sell by means of a vending machine.
b. To sell, especially by peddling.
2. To offer (an idea, for example) for public consideration.

Sorry about the "fucking", but I wanted to stay on topic.

I sure hope they let him masturbate a couple times a day! That kind of stuff could lead to priapism.

The plural of medium is media. "Mediums" is just one of those words we're forced to accept due to mass ignorance (e.g., formulas, personas, platypuses).

> I will note, however, that at least in the United States we went ahead and outlawed indentured servitude, even though (a) it was usually entered into voluntarily (b) it often had a net benefit to the indentured party. Still, we felt that the moral and social cost of the "servitude" part was too high to allow individuals to enter into that sort of contract.

> Perhaps the privacy advocates are arguing along the same lines here.

Right, we stated that some rights are inalienable, thus outlawing indentured servitude. Just tell me what inalienable right is being violated by targeted ads and I'll agree with said privacy advocates.

Look up serendipity. Please. Then respond. I will help you. Here you are.

precis

- a.c.

you either privilege front end services (GUI) or back end services (apache, etc)

virus companies, who appear to have gone quite literally bananas

So have they turned into bananas, or have they just gone to banana rich lands? Sorry, but I can't see how one can literally go bananas.


-Colin

Data is the singular. DATUM IS THE PLURAL

the sentence should read

"Doug Balog, an IBM vice president, noted that 70 percent of the world's datum are still housed in mainframe computers."

I have been correcting people over this for decades and still nobody corrects their usage

Data is the singular. DATUM IS THE PLURAL

the sentence should read

"Doug Balog, an IBM vice president, noted that 70 percent of the world's datum are still housed in mainframe computers."

I have been correcting people over this for decades and still nobody corrects their usage

And if words whose meaning can't be found in the dictionary must not be properly defined, can you tell me what a class is? Not that dictionary.reference.com is a

1. dictionary n. pl.
2. A reference book containing an alphabetical list of words, with information given for each word, usually including meaning, pronunciation, and etymology.

BTW, what was your question?

There's nothing wrong with rhetoric. It's simply the art of arguing persuasively. As to being tricky, I don't see how I'm doing that. I discussed Reagan's preference for military spending up front in an ancestor post on this thread:

Reagan's appetite was for defeating the Soviet Union, and his expensive arms race succeeded beautifully at this---something his liberal critics do not give him adequate credit for---but just like the baby in his metaphor, he showed no sense of fiscal responsibility in cutting other sorts of spending to balance his military spending.

• on Slashdot,
• with an ellipse at the beginning,
• and mispelled grammar

Ok, I'm risk asking this, but by definition, a "wheel" cannot be "square...."

wheel

n.

1. A solid disk or a rigid circular ring connected by spokes to a hub, designed to turn around an axle passed through the center.

And, without pasting it too, a disk must be circular....

So, whatever those things are on that bicycle frame, they are not wheels

I think in the days of good ol' Ben, temporal was more of a religious-philosophical term, as in sense number two to four in the first entry here.

Thanks, AC.

If you had read my post, I said:

"While I support p2p,...

...If you're a proponent of p2p filesharing as I am..."

so I don't think p2p is evil. I think it's great. Try reading before you give a knee-jerk response. We're arguing the same point here.

You can also READ my previous post here

Thanks, AC.

If you had read my post, I said:

"While I support p2p,...

...If you're a proponent of p2p filesharing as I am..."

so I don't think p2p is evil. I think it's great. Try reading before you give a knee-jerk response. We're arguing the same point here.

You can also READ my previous post here