Slashdot Mirror

The key word being hypothethically.

In case your language skills need a little refresher: Of, relating to, or based on a hypothesis

From dictionary.com:

fore-cast (forkst, fr-)
v. forecast, or forecasted forecasting, forecasts
v. tr.

1. To estimate or calculate in advance, especially to predict (weather conditions) by analysis of meteorological data. See Synonyms at predict.
2. To serve as an advance indication of; foreshadow: price increases that forecast inflation.

Yes, they *do* predict.

After 12 months of me paying to ship their broken crap back to them, they refused to replace it once my "Warrantee" was up.

Well there's your problem: never buy a product from a company that spells warranty as "warrantee". You might not be protected.

Ozzy is a geek. See definition 2.

Dictionary entry for 'he' Used to refer to a person whose gender is unspecified or unknown.
Dictionary entry for 'she' [no such thing]

Dictionary entry for 'he' Used to refer to a person whose gender is unspecified or unknown.
Dictionary entry for 'she' [no such thing]

There are other hard disk MP3 players on the market. Quite a few actually. So you prefer the iPod, fine. You pay the price they set for the product they offer. It would be collusion if all MP3 players sold at the same price.

If a company decides to set a price floor for its resellers, that's perfectly legit. If companies decide that all products will be sold at the same price, that's (possibly) collusion.

For reference sake:

collusion (n): A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose.

It takes two to collude!

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

Take a look at that, and then punch yourself in the face because you have no nuts.

reference.com is a gem. Where else could you discover words like gonkulator and .

reference.com is a gem. Where else could you discover words like gonkulator and .

We AREN'T a democracy. We're a Republic.

I'm going to get flamed badly for this but I actually take USA to be...

Plutocratic Republic of United States of Imperial America

I guess that's why I get labelled anti-American but I really believe that... USA is a republic; it is a plutocracy (not democracy); it is practicing imperialism...

I always consider it one of the great historical ironies that one of the only things Jefferson and Hamilton ever agreed on was that a 2-party system was a bad thing. And yet their battles caused us to get locked into one.

That's not true IMO. You cannot blame the problem on their battle. The problem is due to the flaw with the system and has nothing to do with their system (at least that's my opinion). Hamilton's Federalist Party was very weak and dissapeared very quickly. Even during their reign, the Democratic-Republican Party totally dominated for something like 40 years! In fact, if you count the modern day Democratic Party and the Democratic-Republican Party together (they are the same party but their ideologies changed over time), they literally ruled for 100 years! In essense, USA was a one-party state early on. Although since most of the so-called Founding Fathers were radical liberals, parties didn't mean much. The early day parties weren't as static and conservative as now.

I think it is misleading to blame the early feud for the problem. The problem with USA is so entrenched that I don't think it can be changed without a revolution. USA is just too conservative and it is impossible to alter anything (let alone The Constitution). USA will probably turn into a one-party state after the next Al-Qaida attack and after Patriot Act II (and others like it) is passed. Already, outsiders like me consider the Democrats and the Republicans to be the same and this will just make it official.

'You are with us or against us. There is only one party a true patriot will vote for...the only party that is fighting for freedom and repulsing the invading hordes of evil terrorists. There is no peace without war! There is no liberty without slavery! No freedom without imprisonment! Welcome to the only free country in the World.'

Ok, I'm being paranoid in the last part of my message... OR... am I predicting the future? Remains to be seen...another episode :)

Sivaram Velauthapillai

Would have been nice to define a not-often-used word in the article so we all don't have to dig...

To divide (a geographic area) into voting districts so as to give unfair advantage to one party in elections. (Link.)

Give me my karma, baby.

So a processor is only faster if it accomplished the task in less time, which means you are wrong.

I'll bill you for the hours it took to write this.

So a processor is only faster if it accomplished the task in less time, which means you are wrong.

I'll bill you for the hours it took to write this.

So a processor is only faster if it accomplished the task in less time, which means you are wrong.

I'll bill you for the hours it took to write this.

in-i-tial adj. 1. Of, relating to, or occurring at the beginning; first:

took the initial step toward peace.

By your definition, if the sysop of the board sets up the timed event, the BBS is uploading to the PC. But if the user sets up the timed event, the PC is downloading from the BBS.

No, the sysop is uploading to the user's PC and the user is downloading from the sysop's BBS. You're changing the subject of the action mid-sentence, from the people to the machines.

Same software and mechanisms and actions on both ends, both times. That's inconsistent.

If you take the humans out of the equation as you are wont to do, then the BBS would be uploading to the PC in both cases. But if you examine the greater context of who initiated the actions, then you use the upload/download terms relative to the actor, not the hardware.

To upload and to download are transitive verbs. They require a direct object to complete their meanings. Knowing the context of the action is essential to the correct use of them.

Remember, we're talking about computers here. Users don't actually transfer files. Computers do. Instructions have to execute for anything to happen, and that means both ends have to do something.

Then we are talking about different things. I upload a file to you(r computer); I download a file from you(r computer); you upload a file to me(/my computer), you download a file from me(/my computer). It's a quaternary state. The subject (you/I) must be defined as well as the destination. I define it at the human; you define it at the machine or process.

I'm saying that to be accurate you must widen your scope, not contract it. (And that English is for humans, not machines. It should be acceptable to define my actions upon computers with these verbs.)

Besides, computers do nothing without a causer. We have an abundance of passive senders out there that transmit data by remote command. Some also passively receive. But they still do not act unless someone else does. Whosoever does becomes the subject of these verbs. To cast the role of subject onto the machines is to disavow responsibility for the action.

Push and pull is fine. But when one end pulls, the other end has to push. Think of a rope; if two people are each holding a rope taught, one has to push the rope for the other to pull.

But you don't download people, you download files, analogous to inanimate objects. If I pull on a rope attached to an object, that object is not pushing on the rope to bring itself to me. Same if I'm pushing on the object down a rail to someone else, it is not pulling me.

If I pull a product from the shelf, the store owner isn't pushing it into my hands. If I pull you through a doorway, you aren't pushing me through it. And I haven't shoplifted if the store puts a product in my hand and shoves me out the door. If you ignore the greater context, you introduce ambiguity and ignore liability.

And, back to your analogy, if a rope is taut, then both ends are pulling and no one is pushing. If they're moving a taut rope, then one is pulling less than the other, but that doesn't make the lesser puller a pusher.

The applier of the force is the one pushing or pulling. Similarly, the one who initially causes a file transfer is the one downloading or uploading.

Any law that attempts to say "uploading" is okay but "downloading" is not is insane. But fortunately, we don't need to worry about that. You don't outlaw uploading or downloading files.

The legislative angle I referred to is

I do believe you're mistaken.

From dictionary.reference.com:

A rhetorical figure in which incongruous or contradictory terms are combined, as in a deafening silence and a mournful optimist.

Reference

Since you don't understand the meaning of oxymoron, let me enlighten you on the meaning of incongruous and contradictory. Incongruous means they don't go together, like mayo and peanut butter. Contradictory means they are opposites of each other and are mutually exclusive (both conditions can't exist at the same time), like hot and cold.

My implication is not that federal and intelligence are contradictory, merely that they are incongruous under the current (and former) administration. I wouldn't trust Tom Ridge with the security of my house, let alone national security.

allot

People are using the *very real word* allot in a mostly inappropriate way... to mean "much of something".

as in "i gave mike allot, much more than steve."

saying "a lot" is not in any way a correct replacment for "allot" when used inappopriately above.

"a lot" would not serve their purpose, it would mean "a group" or "a portion"...

so, really, your sig is stupid. please change it.

I knew I should have put the dictionary.com links. Verbage is a deliberate misspelling, implying garbage. I get a kick out of the usage here at my job for a major US bank, because the two are used interchangeably. I have not yet found a positive correlation between the use of "verbage" and the subject matter being such tripe as mission statements and the like, so I usually just snicker to myself at the ignorance. Simple things, and all that.

Go figure. An ignorant AC.

Lol, higher clock speed does mean a processor is faster. It however doesn't mean a system is faster.

Lol look up Megahertz.

Sounds like you were using a program to break that down... a grammatical script kiddie?!

I suggest a degree in linguistics, or failing that a dictonary. Inflation (stand alone) is a noun but when used like increase as in 'increase of prices' or change as in 'change of prices', inflation is a verb, as increase and change are. You are correct the phrase "inflation of prices" is a subordinate clause, but even subordinate clauses can br broken down (!), in this case "inflation of prices" breaks down into inflation being a verb and prices being a noun.

Sounds like you were using a program to break that down... a grammatical script kiddie?!

I suggest a degree in linguistics, or failing that a dictonary. Inflation (stand alone) is a noun but when used like increase as in 'increase of prices' or change as in 'change of prices', inflation is a verb, as increase and change are. You are correct the phrase "inflation of prices" is a subordinate clause, but even subordinate clauses can br broken down (!), in this case "inflation of prices" breaks down into inflation being a verb and prices being a noun.

Sounds like you were using a program to break that down... a grammatical script kiddie?!

I suggest a degree in linguistics, or failing that a dictonary. Inflation (stand alone) is a noun but when used like increase as in 'increase of prices' or change as in 'change of prices', inflation is a verb, as increase and change are. You are correct the phrase "inflation of prices" is a subordinate clause, but even subordinate clauses can br broken down (!), in this case "inflation of prices" breaks down into inflation being a verb and prices being a noun.

The gimp doesn't exactly limp along anymore now does it? dictionary

Paul Spurgeon, general counsel for the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada

The SCAMP of Canada?

It is not a surprising desire at all for a mooncalf.

I don't normally (ever?) do grammer flames, but you only used one word and you messed it up.

Many of us identify as gamers. Many of us find ourselves in the position of having to defend our lifestyle choice to other people, as if our hobby were removing the hinges from public doors or planting cannibis around the local elementary school.

Penny Arcade's latest comic shows this perception, in that we now have something to point to and say "see, we're not bad people." Why do we have to donate generously and publically to charity just to prove we aren't beasts, as if the donation somehow atones for our pasttime? It's not like community theater actors have to go outside and rake the leaves so that people will say "they may be evil, but at least they rake the leaves."

I'm a game developer. In conversation when I mention being a game developer to non-gamers I'm instantly shunned. Obviously I'm selling violence and sexual debasement to children, along with the worst devil of all, Idleness. Pointing out that the last game I worked on was intended for adults in their mid 30's just makes them think I'm selling old smut to children. Pointing out the one before that was a non-violent basketball game? I'm blamed for frat parties.

It's prejudiced crap, and we shouldn't have to put up with it.

I beg your pardon?

Here in Canada I've seen kph quite a few times, and it most certainly is a correct usage, albeit it is not as common as km/h. I think a lot of car speedometers use kph.

I won't mention the fact that there are two perfectly good words for this rhetorical device.

Not only paralepsis, but also apophasis.

The EFF could be trying to pursue them under charges of Barratry.

No, actually it's called paralepsis.

• 1. Of, relating to, or resembling a digit, especially a finger.
• 2. Operated or done with the fingers: a digital switch.
  (source)

two limits to the constitution's speech protections

20 entries found for abridge.

Entry: abridge

Function: verb

Definition: shorten

Synonyms: abbreviate, abstract, blue pencil, chop, clip, compress, concentrate, condense, contract, curtail, cut, decrease, digest, diminish, lessen, limit, narrow, nutshell, reduce, restrict, slash, snip, summarize, trim, truncate

Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press

How'd you come up with that definition?

Hey thanks for questioning my presuppositions, and I'm not above admitting when I'm wrong. "Revenue" is almost always defined in terms of tax income, as seen in these definitions:

1
2
3
4
5

However, I disagree that it's like your landlord: you entered into contract with your landlord willingly after considering your options. I was born here. (And as other respondents have pointed out, "I can just move" is not a valid response to people who are discussing how to change the democracy for the better.)

He did not use the terms "die" and "dies" incorrectly. See here. Both uses are acceptible.

Ultimately, the rising muslim and anti-semetic populations in europe

You do know that most semitic people are muslim, don't you?

nickle

Notice how "nickle" is defined as the five-cent piece second, right after the bird definition?
You may prefer "nickel", but "nickle" is still denotatively correct, and, IMHO, the preferred pronunciation.

Well, you'd have to sell all those nickles to an aviary or something. *Then* you wouldn't be broke.

Unless of course you meant "nickel".

Nope, he's right. See here.

IEEE double precision floating point gives you 52 bits of mantissa.

Mantissa bits eh?

-----------------
The part of a floating point number which, when multiplied by its radix raised to the power of its exponent, gives its value. The mantissa may include the number's sign or this may be considered to be a separate part.

(1996-06-15)

Source: The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, 1993-2003 Denis Howe

-----------------

Ya learn something new every day...

IEEE double precision floating point gives you 52 bits of mantissa.

Mantissa bits eh?

-----------------
The part of a floating point number which, when multiplied by its radix raised to the power of its exponent, gives its value. The mantissa may include the number's sign or this may be considered to be a separate part.

(1996-06-15)

Source: The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, 1993-2003 Denis Howe

-----------------

Ya learn something new every day...

IEEE double precision floating point gives you 52 bits of mantissa.

Mantissa bits eh?

-----------------
The part of a floating point number which, when multiplied by its radix raised to the power of its exponent, gives its value. The mantissa may include the number's sign or this may be considered to be a separate part.

(1996-06-15)

Source: The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, 1993-2003 Denis Howe

-----------------

Ya learn something new every day...

IEEE double precision floating point gives you 52 bits of mantissa.

Mantissa bits eh?

-----------------
The part of a floating point number which, when multiplied by its radix raised to the power of its exponent, gives its value. The mantissa may include the number's sign or this may be considered to be a separate part.

(1996-06-15)

Source: The Free On-line Dictionary of Computing, 1993-2003 Denis Howe

-----------------

Ya learn something new every day...

Can't another country simply give us the finger once and a while and do their own god damned thing

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

maybe incentivizing was what the submitter was after. Oh, and by the way, don't rag on someone for not "no"ing the right word to use if you can't do it yourself ;)

Robot:
1. A mechanical device that sometimes resembles a human and is capable of performing a variety of often complex human tasks on command or by being programmed in advance.

Your arguments fail so badly because you don't have an abstract view of what you're talking about. A goal can be "I want to pick this thing up" or as simple as "I want to move forward". A decision can be "The obstacle is blocking the left path so I will choose to go right" or "I will perform the action specified in my command input instead of the other 3 possible actions that could be commanded".

If I control an RC car, I do not control each action of it. I specify that it should go left. It has implicit understanding of how to move the wheels simultaneously. It knows when the wheels have reached maximum deflection. Yet all I said was "Go left" and it performs that action. That's all there needs to be said about robots really. They act from a command. How intelligent they are is irrelevant.

Do you understand that until you create an abstract model for a "robot" you are simply giving examples of what you THINK are robots? You have not created a model which is why your requirement that robots make decisions now becomes a requirement that they have goals. Each new specific example brings up a different problem which can only be resolved in the definition is more abstract. By the way, I did my MS degree work in mobile robotics. Yes, they were decision making and goal oriented so I think they were robots! :) By the way, what is the goal of the active suspension? Is it possible to say it has a goal because it will 1) never achieve the goal and decide it is finished 2) can never be given a different goal?

About ABS and regenerative braking, I think you've proven my point. ABS and regenerative braking are entirely separate concepts. You can implement a form of ABS with regenerative braking but there's nothing innherent in regenerative braking that says when it is used, ABS is automatically useless. Again... think ABSTRACT! Regenerative braking is the concept of reusing kinetic energy from your car. ABS is the concept of preventing skidding wheels. They are SEPARATE!

Shouldn't that be viri or virii, or something like that?

No

The article is in English, not Latin ;)

>We've always been told that pirate games push prices up,
>but doesn't this news suggest that piracy in China
>has in fact pushed prices down?

Ever hear of profiteering? It's easy to compete with pirates if your prices are bloated to begin with. In the bygone era, profiteering was a dirty, ugly word. Today it is heralded because it makes shareholders happy.