Slashdot Mirror

Please offer some reference, however obscure, indicating 'spelt' as the preferred past tense conjugation of spell.

Why don't you trust Google or even Dictionary.com?

And I quote: "spelt: A past tense and a past participle of spell". Satisfied? Want another English lesson?

I suggest you reread my original post and replies. I never said that "spelled" wasn't correct, only that "spelt" was so: in your smugness, you've incorrectly assumed that the only one of the two is acceptable.

As I've pointed out elsewhere, they are both correct and the usage in this context depends on where you were educated. I, as someone who's not American, use "spelt" in this context, and I added the text in brackets because I'm fed up of smart asses telling me that I've got it wrong when I most certainly haven't.

Ahem. You may find this link useful...

the editors haven't spelt (yes, "spelt" not "spelled")

Webster disagrees with you.

spell
spelt

Dictionary.com at least lists it as a past tense of spell, but so is spelled.

In fact, every dictionary I've checked lists either spelled or both spelled and spelt. It's pretty clear which way the language is moving though. And, unusually, for once it's towards consistency.

Obligatory nerd tie-in: That's why Mozilla kicks IE's little tin arse. Quicklink "dict knive" --> no entry for knive.

I think you mean rationale.

I think you may want to read this.

The site isn't responding so I haven't seen anything explaining the derivation of the name but it seems like an odd choice

laches, n: Negligence or undue delay in asserting a legal right or privilege.

As the judge noted in his ruling, "...the Supreme Court held that a person 'may forfeit his rights as an inventor by a willful or negligent postponement of his claims, or by an attempt to withhold the benefit of his improvement from the public until a similar or the same improvement should have been made and introduced to others'". Lemelson was found to have delayed the prosecution of his patents--albeit within the rules and procedures of the USPTO--and Symbol and Cognex were able to use the defense of prosecution laches to defend themselves from Lemelson's request for license fees by getting the claims of the relevant patents ruled unenforceable. The judge noted that

More than five million United States patents have issued from 1914 through 2001. Lemelson's own exhibits demonstrate that of the 325 patents that issued in that period with a prosecution pendency of longer than eleven years, Lemelson holds the top thirteen positions for the longest prosecutions. Some of the claims asserted by Lemelson in this case will not expire until 2011, fifty-five years after the 1956 application was filed and forty-eight years after the application issued as a patent...If the defense of prosecution laches does not apply under the totality of circumstances presented here, the Court can envision very few circumstances under which it would.

In addition, the judge ruled that the claims were "not infringed by Symbol and Cognex because use of the accused products does not satisfy one or more of the limitations of each and every asserted claim [i.e., Lemelson's patent does not cover the products for which Lemelson was trying to get license fees]; and that the claims are invalid for lack of written description and enablement even if construed in the manner urged by Lemelson...." This last point refers to the so-called "enablement" requirement of a patent: A patent should enable one of ordinary skill in the art to duplicate the invention from the patent document. The judge ruled that "one of ordinary skill in the art to which it pertains" would be unable to make a functional machine vision system as described by Lemelson's patents.

Whew.

Yes, and to hitler anyone non aryan was not human.

But that doesn't make it true.

Saying anything, include your misguided attempt at analogy, doesn't make anything true. Okay, and...?

You don't get to redefine free to mean the opposite of what it means, just as he doesn't get to redefine human.

You just made an analogy that claims simply saying something doesn't make it true. That would include your absurd statement over what I do or don't get to say!

We can clear this up right now. I agree 100% with what this meaning of free is. I believe most literate people would agree as well. Even if you did agree with that definition, you may find that we would still disagree on the definition of freedom in regards to Open Source development. The reason may escape you, but it is simply subjective interpretation. An unavoidable human condition. It isn't clear to people who take things literally how such a thing is allowable, but in this case take my word for it. The best you can do is allow the market to prove who's right and who's wrong. It all honesty, it won't even do that. It will simply prove who's best fit for the purposes of the majority.

I love how you talk about "community" and "greedy" and the "Selfish".... you sure are a communist, aren't ya?

No. But, what are you, who snidely loves the talk of "greedy" and "Selfish" and the "community"? Someone who prefers greed and selfishness? An uncivilized person? What label of anti-community superiority would you prefer to wear?

Bet ya think corporations are generally evil?

Only those who violate the community's trust and don't reciprocate. Correction, I also don't like corporations who lie, cheat, steal, and hurt people. You might even say that I don't like uncivilized behavior in corporation, as I wouldn't like it in an individual.

I think you've never written a line of code in your life.

Let's hope for your financial well being you don't invest in the stock market.

If you had, you'd know you can't close open sourced software in a commercial environemnt practially-- you have to commit your changes to the public tree, otherwise you have to track what everyone else does.

And, of course companies like Sun, HP, IBM, SGI, SCO...etc, never had the resources to do that during the Unix Wars and later up until the late 90's. They all made Unix from scratch and none of their closed source Unix variants ever came from previously open source roots. Please, your showing your historical ignorance. Of course, you can always claim that saying anything doesn't make it true - HA!

All the "stealing" you guys think you're preventing is a figment of your imagination.

The literally minded can be considered a danger to themselves, as well as the community. Theft in terms of the loss of social profit can be considered a simile. A more accurate phrasing would be that when a person or company takes something from the community, without giving back to the community, that act is like theft of the community's potential gain. Those who are concerned over the loss of the community's potential gain simply use the GPL to mitigate that. Those who prefer the BSD don't view the community's interest in the same manner, allowing the proprietary forks during the Unix Wars to occur.

Just like all communists who want to force others to live like they do "for the good of the community" you try to force people to your ideology,

Please point out where I force anyone to do anything. The laws you are forced to live by are passed by those representing the community. Are those laws communist? Are you, for living under them? Your simple worldvi

Yes, and to hitler anyone non aryan was not human.

But that doesn't make it true.

Saying anything, include your misguided attempt at analogy, doesn't make anything true. Okay, and...?

You don't get to redefine free to mean the opposite of what it means, just as he doesn't get to redefine human.

You just made an analogy that claims simply saying something doesn't make it true. That would include your absurd statement over what I do or don't get to say!

We can clear this up right now. I agree 100% with what this meaning of free is. I believe most literate people would agree as well. Even if you did agree with that definition, you may find that we would still disagree on the definition of freedom in regards to Open Source development. The reason may escape you, but it is simply subjective interpretation. An unavoidable human condition. It isn't clear to people who take things literally how such a thing is allowable, but in this case take my word for it. The best you can do is allow the market to prove who's right and who's wrong. It all honesty, it won't even do that. It will simply prove who's best fit for the purposes of the majority.

I love how you talk about "community" and "greedy" and the "Selfish".... you sure are a communist, aren't ya?

No. But, what are you, who snidely loves the talk of "greedy" and "Selfish" and the "community"? Someone who prefers greed and selfishness? An uncivilized person? What label of anti-community superiority would you prefer to wear?

Bet ya think corporations are generally evil?

Only those who violate the community's trust and don't reciprocate. Correction, I also don't like corporations who lie, cheat, steal, and hurt people. You might even say that I don't like uncivilized behavior in corporation, as I wouldn't like it in an individual.

I think you've never written a line of code in your life.

Let's hope for your financial well being you don't invest in the stock market.

If you had, you'd know you can't close open sourced software in a commercial environemnt practially-- you have to commit your changes to the public tree, otherwise you have to track what everyone else does.

And, of course companies like Sun, HP, IBM, SGI, SCO...etc, never had the resources to do that during the Unix Wars and later up until the late 90's. They all made Unix from scratch and none of their closed source Unix variants ever came from previously open source roots. Please, your showing your historical ignorance. Of course, you can always claim that saying anything doesn't make it true - HA!

All the "stealing" you guys think you're preventing is a figment of your imagination.

The literally minded can be considered a danger to themselves, as well as the community. Theft in terms of the loss of social profit can be considered a simile. A more accurate phrasing would be that when a person or company takes something from the community, without giving back to the community, that act is like theft of the community's potential gain. Those who are concerned over the loss of the community's potential gain simply use the GPL to mitigate that. Those who prefer the BSD don't view the community's interest in the same manner, allowing the proprietary forks during the Unix Wars to occur.

Just like all communists who want to force others to live like they do "for the good of the community" you try to force people to your ideology,

Please point out where I force anyone to do anything. The laws you are forced to live by are passed by those representing the community. Are those laws communist? Are you, for living under them? Your simple worldvi

"Poor little Nimrod!"

Inventors: Megiddo; Nimrod (Palo Alto, CA); Zhu; Xiaoming (San Jose, CA)
Assignee: International Business Machines

Pints, I understand. It would be near-sacrosanct to get rid of pints.

I do not think that word means what you think it means... sacrosanct ("Regarded as sacred and inviolable").

Instead, I think you're looking for the word "profane, blasphemous or sacrilegious" or that you meant that beer being served in pints is sacrosanct.

Unless, of course, vitae was the genitive (possessive) singular form of vita.

Although, to be fair, dictionary.com seems to want it both ways.

Wikipedia is more explicit. I think it's unfair that they call you ignorant, but maybe they know you better than I do.

And if you're going to go with the French spelling and use accents, you'd damn well better use both; accents affect the pronunciation of those vowels, you know!

Intelligence is often judged first by ones appearence. She has yet to break my initial stereotype. Hence my stereotype, without further information, is correct.

The use of literally in the method in which I did is a common and often unnoticed mistake. [1] My apologies for not being as studious as you. In my opinion criticizing one's grammar in an online forum is the highest form of pedantery.

So please sheath your Pedant Broadsword +5 and make a worthwhile point.

[1] Reference to common mistake about the use of the word "literally".

From Dictionary.com (emphasis mine) -

stupid ( P ) Pronunciation Key (stpd, sty-)
adj. stupider, stupidest

I thought that Mr. Spolsky had made a mistake too, until I noticed that the word stupider _does_ exist as an adjective :)

I found a "spell check" and a proofreader, why can't you?

Borders can't be see from space.

Not quite, this one can be seen from space.

- Did I just nitpick a troll?

Dude, you need to learn this word.

Sound like a bunch of dingleberries to me.

If I had the choice between spending eternity either in "The Office" or "Sex and the City's" New York I think I would abscond and run screaming for the safety of Helms deep (straight through Fangorn forest AND the Uruk'hai army). Busting the heads of evil scum with the Rohirrim must be better than spending eternity with a bunch of neurotic yuppies...

link

trifecta ( P ) Pronunciation Key (tr-fkt)
n.
A system of betting in which the bettor must pick the first three winners in the correct sequence. Also called triple.

i dont really get how that applies tho. maybe you meant horsemen of the apocolypse?

Sounds like his parents did a better job of teaching him ethics than yours did. I hope you're not a sysadmin with real users or you've grown up since then.

Maud is an anagram of MUDA

Duma is another anagram of MUDA.

What does this all mean?
Diddly squat.
Have a nice day!

Maud is an anagram of MUDA

Duma is another anagram of MUDA.

What does this all mean?
Diddly squat.
Have a nice day!

Note that "Quean" refers not just to 'liz, but also the battalion of "advisors" that command her.

dictionary.reference.com defines "Quean" as:

1. A woman regarded as being disreputable, especially a prostitute.

2 Scots. A young woman.

They define "Quean" also as:

1. A woman; a young or unmarried woman; a girl. [Obs. or Scot.] --Chaucer.

2. A low woman; a wench; a slut. ``The dread of every scolding quean.'' --Gay.

You're right, just check right here

this bill is just extending the same protection to electronic databases that they would have if the same information was published in a dead-tree version

False. There has neven been any difference in the rules between "dead-tree" and electronic.

The parent poster was just slightly off when he used the phrase "artistic merit". The Supreme Court has ruled that copyright can only protect creativity. You cannot have any coptright on facts, whether it is dead-tree or online.

Young's Concordance was a list of all words in the King James Bible

You cannot have a copyright on a simple factual list, even on dead-tree.

stating in which passage each word appeared (giving a few words of context), and what the original Greek or Hebrew word was for the English word

Here you are touching on a creative element, and copyright does protect that element even when it it is a minor element. Choosing how to handle and catagorize different sorts of words, how much and what sort of context (if any) to provide. Selecting or creating definitions and translations. Creating a format. Choosing what to index and what not to index. I'm sure this book contained numerous other creative elements.

Roget's Thesaurus was basically the dictionary, re-indexed.

Again, a simple factual listing or sorting of words would not be copyightable. Howeven creating a Thesaurus contains substantial creative element. You actually have to choose synonyms and antonyms and create groupings and write definitions. Just take a look at this online thesaurus. Nine separate entries for "obfuscate" encompassing scores of words. Someone had to pick and choose all of that.

Both these books were essentially "databases on paper".

And in every case the creative elements are protected by copyright, not the facts.

How much "artistic merit" does the dictionary have? It's copyrighted.

Writing definitions is creative work. The alphabetical list of words themeselves CANNOT be protected by copyright. Dictionaries check with each other and copy words from each other all the time. It is not copyright infringment unless they copy the creative elements - the definitions.

It is perfectly legal to start up your own dictionary by scanning in and aphabetizing the words from any source, even a copyrighted dictionary. Such a dictionary (naked of definitions) is quite usefull for a variety of purposes. Of cource your dictionary will be much more useful in general if you include definitions. You have to make your own definitions to avoid copyright infringment.

how about the POSIX spec? Artistic merit? Don't make me laugh.

I am a programmer. Writing software has a HUGE creative element. Hell, I've seen code plenty of artistic merit, but the standard is creative element.

You are free to copy the fact that 1+1=2 out of some else's software, but you cannot copy some elaborate and creative code I wrote to add 1+1.

-

There was something better than a balanced budget back then, there was a SURPLUS.

If we can't pay off our deficits in a boom, then when can we?

You're confusing deficit with debt. In the simplest of terms, debt is what you owe. You run a deficit when you can't even pay off the interest on what you owe, so that you owe more and more each year. I'm Canadian, so I don't keep close attention to US statistics, but I recall Clinton having surpluses at least for most of his last years, and was at least matching the interest on debt. Even Bush had that luxery when he first started.

The right way to manage deficits is to shrink them in boom cycles, and allow them to grow in down cycles

Bullshit! The right way is to pay of DEBT in boom cycles, and at least make sure there is no defecit in all other cycles. In down cycles you borrow, but you don't borrow beyond your means. If the United States had a Master Card, it would be cut in half by now.

Bush has faced a lot of problems in his presidency that Clinton was fortunate enough to not have, and it is unfair to criticize him for not balancing the budget in a recession when Clinton couldn't do it in the midst of the dot-com bubble.

I won't argue that Clinton had it better than Bush, but Bush knew just as well as anyone else that the bubble had burst, and could have better managed the TRILLION DOLLAR surplus he had, rather than stuffing his fat friends pockets with your hard earned money.

I believe that the deficit is too big an issue to try and blame it on any one person or party.

Yup. But when I think of lack of fiscal responsibility, I think G E O R G E W. B U S H

There was something better than a balanced budget back then, there was a SURPLUS.

If we can't pay off our deficits in a boom, then when can we?

You're confusing deficit with debt. In the simplest of terms, debt is what you owe. You run a deficit when you can't even pay off the interest on what you owe, so that you owe more and more each year. I'm Canadian, so I don't keep close attention to US statistics, but I recall Clinton having surpluses at least for most of his last years, and was at least matching the interest on debt. Even Bush had that luxery when he first started.

The right way to manage deficits is to shrink them in boom cycles, and allow them to grow in down cycles

Bullshit! The right way is to pay of DEBT in boom cycles, and at least make sure there is no defecit in all other cycles. In down cycles you borrow, but you don't borrow beyond your means. If the United States had a Master Card, it would be cut in half by now.

Bush has faced a lot of problems in his presidency that Clinton was fortunate enough to not have, and it is unfair to criticize him for not balancing the budget in a recession when Clinton couldn't do it in the midst of the dot-com bubble.

I won't argue that Clinton had it better than Bush, but Bush knew just as well as anyone else that the bubble had burst, and could have better managed the TRILLION DOLLAR surplus he had, rather than stuffing his fat friends pockets with your hard earned money.

I believe that the deficit is too big an issue to try and blame it on any one person or party.

Yup. But when I think of lack of fiscal responsibility, I think G E O R G E W. B U S H

Hey smart guy, maybe they meant nobbiest? Ever think of that?

One of the definitions/uses of one is -- Denoting a person or thing conceived or spoken of indefinitely; a certain.

Plus it sounds good too.

I suppose you mean "disinclined."

That was the intended idea, but my wording was deliberate. I was being sarcastic.

"golf

n. A game played on a large outdoor course with a series of 9 or 18 holes spaced far apart, the object being to propel a small, hard ball with the use of various clubs into each hole with as few strokes as possible.

intr.v. golfed, golfing, golfs

To play this game."

Your definition of theft is a bit off. You have the right to believe that copyright infringement is the most heinous of crimes if you wish, but theft it just ain't. To constitute theft, someone has to be deprived of property. With Copyright infringement, that clearly does not take place. That's really all there is to it. Coyright infringement is not theft by definition, so get ov

The Mods are on GNIKCUF (backwards) shpxvat (rot13) CRACK! (Score:3, Informative)!??! HELLO! this is FUNNY FF UHHH NNN EEE

The original Watergate crime was part of a much larger pattern.

The Watergate break-ins were about political dirty tricks and elections (which is bad), but the "HackerGate" (if you will) is about the shaping of the Federal Bench. Far worse and longer lasting, hell the only reason why Bush(the younger) is President is because the Supreme Court was split 5 to 4. All Federal Judges are lifetime appointments.

Just because the security guard is asleep in the lobby doesn't mean you can root throught the office.

But that isn't exactly the same as well....That is why it is called an ANALOGY Sounds to me that you just wanted a platform for your anti-copyright agenda. Oh sure you say violating a copyright is wrong, "but it's not the same as theft". Perhaps you don't think that it's theft, but it is (sorry).

Just remember, ethics are for people who can't afford lawyers !

First, Microsoft holds no actual power (the ability to initiate force as a means to an end). Only government holds actual power. What Microsoft holds is market presence. Government may initiate force on behalf of Microsoft, but if Microsoft initiates force without the "blessing" of government, they are criminals.

Sure. If you redefine all your terms to coincide with your belifis, you can prove anything. However, most definitions of power don't say anything about the government. In fact, there are 16 diffrent definitions. Microsoft can certanly influence others, it can act effectively, etc.

link

A technician hired by the new judiciary chairman, Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, apparently made a mistake

That wasn't a computer malfunction. The computer and the software worked exactly like the way they were supposed to work.

Twat?

Allow me to add:

YOU FAIL IT, CLANCY.

See also: You

synopsis (P) Pronunciation Key (s-npss)
n. pl. synopses (-sz) A brief outline or general view, as of a subject or written work; an abstract or a summary.

Perhaps something like a caldera?

Don't be so quick to call someone a moron when you might be one yourself.

Usage Note: Irregardless is a word that many mistakenly believe to be correct usage in formal style, when in fact it is used chiefly in nonstandard speech or casual writing. Coined in the United States in the early 20th century, it has met with a blizzard of condemnation for being an improper yoking of irrespective and regardless and for the logical absurdity of combining the negative ir- prefix and -less suffix in a single term. Although one might reasonably argue that it is no different from words with redundant affixes like debone and unravel, it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so.

...will prepare you to identify the capital of Nairobi.

Ahem. Nairobi is the capital of Kenya. Perhaps the poster should read his Encyclopedia Britannica.

You should read your dictionary. From the definition of of:

11. Specified as; named or called: a depth of ten feet; the Garden of Eden.

klaxon definition

I think SCO is misunderestimating the tolerance for stupid circus antics from big business overseas.

I think you'll find they're misunderestimafying. Yes I'm being a smart-ass.

My wife has a Samsung SPH-i700 wireless phone from Verizon Wireless (motto: I am your father, Luke), and while it is a great tool to retrieve email remotely, it is an absolute JOKE as a wireless phone. To make a call, you must tap the start menu, then select "Phone" from the menu. My wife, a relatively small woman, finds the handset clunky and impossible to hold for more than a few minutes, so she uses speakerphone for almost every single conversation. The thing also loves to be tethered to an electrical outlet at every opportunity, battery life is dismal.

People who want to create features for wireless phones need to realize that ringtones in the workplace or in the presence of anyone over 14 make the owner of a ringing phone look asinine, camera phones are for perverts, and that anything that chews batteries generally makes my phone less useful.

Give me a phone that is lightweight, gets decent talk time off a single charge (I'd LOVE to be able to carry my phone an entire work week without charging), and that has features I'll actually use, and I'll be a customer for life.

Give me a PDA with a sorry excuse for a phone built-in, and I'll go find another vendor.