Slashdot Mirror

By the way, the now-common definition of communism includes what I was referring to.

Socialism would also apply.

Africa's state-run utility giant Eskom
I'm going to pop a vein! Afirca is not a country, it's a continent . South Africa, the country where Eskom resides, is a country in Africa (easily confused with South America by Americans. South America is a continent south of North America, the continent with three different countries on it, including the USA). There are 54 independent, different countries in Africa, each with their own government. Africa is not simply a big ol' jungle where everyone speaks Swahili (only 50 million of the more than 700 million people in Africa speak Swahili). /rant
OK, now that I got that off my chest: Eskom has been talking about this for a while now, and they are facing some resistance to the idea. The problem being the general conception that "nuclear is evil".

You need a dictionary, idiot.

Scroll down a bit for the verb definition.

Here is a link to a page about it.

It's a neat idea, but I'm not sure how popular it is with hardware makers, and it somewhat constrains the implementation in hardware. The basic underlying princepals of the hardware would have to support the way the high level model is written, as opposed to having the software conform to the software.

It has to be a split driver model, as OS's organize themselves differently, so what would be highly efficient in one would be dog slow in another. This is also why various people recommend not porting a Windows driver to Linux, but to instead write a native Linux driver. Somebody presented a paper on the 10 things not to do while writing a Linux driver.

Notice, that I2C is also how lots of Linux drivers are written for block devices, because lots of block devices have a high layer, a mid layer, and a low level. Normally the high level, and mid layer are similar between lots of drivers, and generally get squeezed into a single driver.

Kirby

"Atheism" is a tricky word to use, because it is an invented word that has both entered the vulgar lexicon and been used as an identifier of a "movement" of sorts, despite that movement's subsequent fractionalization into finer shadings of meaning.

Your assertion that atheism is a "tricky" word appears to be baseless; the word atheism traces back to the Greek "atheos" and I do not see how you can deride it as an "invented word" as it is no more "invented" than any other word.

The fact that a word bases on a Greek root does not imply that it dates back to ancient Greece; merely, instead, that its inventor had a knowledge of the grecian language.

I did a quick search, and discovered a site that claims that the modern usage of the term "atheism" (and "theism") dates back only to the time of the French Enlightenment.

Etymology aside, Atheism remains a "tricky" term because it has so many distinct shades of meaning. A common dictionary search, returning 3 sources, lists "godlessness" as a second definiton for each one, and a search for godlessness returns those same three sources, each of which defines "godlessness" as "wickedness".

You'll have to explain what you mean by "vulgar lexicon"; the use of the term "vulgar" has a negative connotation that I do not believe you can apply to atheism.

No, it doesn't. "Vulgar lexicon" is a synonym for "vernacular." I.e., the common tongue spoken without jargon or specific contextual redefinitions.

You will also need to provide evidence of an atheist "movement". There are atheist organizations, but then there are organizations for stamp collectors and golfers; the mere existence of an organization does not constitute a movement.

It does when, prior to a certain period of time (say, the French Enlightenment or thereabouts), there was essentially no Atheism, and it would be fairly easy to research and learn that atheism has spread and become both more popular and more accepted as centuries have passed.

These are not merely "technical" differences, they are actual, significant, important differences that cannot be ignored.

There are differences. For the context of "is atheism a religion", they can be ignored--or, to phrase it better, glossed-over--so that we can discuss the larger issue.

I merely proposed what I did because I saw that confusion was arising from the difference of the terms.

Your attempt to "simplify" matters by ignoring or downplaying these differences is not acceptable in the context of this discussion,

We are not discussing the finer points of atheism or agnosticism. A common search reveals that approximately half of the definitions of "agnostic" refer specifically to divinty or religion. Ergo, it seems prudent to ignore each other's usage of "atheist" or "agnostic" and instead focus on the larger picture of the discussion.

which is why no matter how many times you ask me to abandon my position and accept yours I will not do so.

I am not, and have not, and will not, ask you to abandon your position on the meanings of the various words--though I will remind you, yet again, that English dictionaries are all descriptive and not proscriptive--that is, they are used best to learn new words or understand unfamiliar ones, not as an authorative source to settle issues of real merit.

Instead, I will simply re-state my suggestion that you cease both your juvenile "corrections" of my use of "agnostic" as "atheist" and we move on to matters of actual substance and not mere tit-for-tate squabbling.

"Atheism" is a tricky word to use, because it is an invented word that has both entered the vulgar lexicon and been used as an identifier of a "movement" of sorts, despite that movement's subsequent fractionalization into finer shadings of meaning.

Your assertion that atheism is a "tricky" word appears to be baseless; the word atheism traces back to the Greek "atheos" and I do not see how you can deride it as an "invented word" as it is no more "invented" than any other word.

The fact that a word bases on a Greek root does not imply that it dates back to ancient Greece; merely, instead, that its inventor had a knowledge of the grecian language.

I did a quick search, and discovered a site that claims that the modern usage of the term "atheism" (and "theism") dates back only to the time of the French Enlightenment.

Etymology aside, Atheism remains a "tricky" term because it has so many distinct shades of meaning. A common dictionary search, returning 3 sources, lists "godlessness" as a second definiton for each one, and a search for godlessness returns those same three sources, each of which defines "godlessness" as "wickedness".

You'll have to explain what you mean by "vulgar lexicon"; the use of the term "vulgar" has a negative connotation that I do not believe you can apply to atheism.

No, it doesn't. "Vulgar lexicon" is a synonym for "vernacular." I.e., the common tongue spoken without jargon or specific contextual redefinitions.

You will also need to provide evidence of an atheist "movement". There are atheist organizations, but then there are organizations for stamp collectors and golfers; the mere existence of an organization does not constitute a movement.

It does when, prior to a certain period of time (say, the French Enlightenment or thereabouts), there was essentially no Atheism, and it would be fairly easy to research and learn that atheism has spread and become both more popular and more accepted as centuries have passed.

These are not merely "technical" differences, they are actual, significant, important differences that cannot be ignored.

There are differences. For the context of "is atheism a religion", they can be ignored--or, to phrase it better, glossed-over--so that we can discuss the larger issue.

I merely proposed what I did because I saw that confusion was arising from the difference of the terms.

Your attempt to "simplify" matters by ignoring or downplaying these differences is not acceptable in the context of this discussion,

We are not discussing the finer points of atheism or agnosticism. A common search reveals that approximately half of the definitions of "agnostic" refer specifically to divinty or religion. Ergo, it seems prudent to ignore each other's usage of "atheist" or "agnostic" and instead focus on the larger picture of the discussion.

which is why no matter how many times you ask me to abandon my position and accept yours I will not do so.

I am not, and have not, and will not, ask you to abandon your position on the meanings of the various words--though I will remind you, yet again, that English dictionaries are all descriptive and not proscriptive--that is, they are used best to learn new words or understand unfamiliar ones, not as an authorative source to settle issues of real merit.

Instead, I will simply re-state my suggestion that you cease both your juvenile "corrections" of my use of "agnostic" as "atheist" and we move on to matters of actual substance and not mere tit-for-tate squabbling.

Also, the word is pseudonym.

Here's a helpful reference site

The point of this is that there are legitimate companies receiving the refferals from spammers, often through many layers. For the life of me i can't find the story, but a reporter created an email address & a fictional persona to go along with it. The email address was seeded in forums and the like relating to home loans and mortgages. They started receiving spam and responded to several with requests for more information (using the fictional name/address and some identifier for that specific email). They eventually received mail from large mortgage companies and thus the process began. The reporter contacted each company and explained what they had done and would they please investigate. I think only one company really did, but eventually the information was traced back through 15 different refferal companies and several countries and eventually ended with the spammer kicked from the refferal program. The big discoveries according to the reporter was 1) This information was making its way to nationally recognized corporations and 2) The amount of money that exchanged hands from beginning to end for these names and addresses.

If you can flood the refferal program with large amounts of innocuous, but bogus information, the spammers will either make a stronger effort to target their mailing lists or companies will pay them jack squat for each refferal.

Perhaps one of these is the "Gaul" you're looking for?

If not, err, move along, these are not the Gauls you're looking for.

BTW :-)
gaul
gall

Perhaps one of these is the "Gaul" you're looking for?

If not, err, move along, these are not the Gauls you're looking for.

BTW :-)
gaul
gall

-from dictionary.reference.com

Just about every WWII historian considers "The Allied Powers" to include the Soviet Union. Whether you like it or not, it's true, you revisionist moron.

Despite the common mispronunciation that would result in this spelling, it is in fact "niche".

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=*&q=shut ter

c.f.:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=*&q=shud der

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=*&q=shut ter

c.f.:

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=*&q=shud der

Hey This may interest you....

a little Blurb about how Gork was able to Grok the internet or Grok life without having to be a GoAT

Hey This may interest you....

a little Blurb about how Gork was able to Grok the internet or Grok life without having to be a GoAT

Hey This may interest you....

a little Blurb about how Gork was able to Grok the internet or Grok life without having to be a GoAT

Hey This may interest you....

a little Blurb about how Gork was able to Grok the internet or Grok life without having to be a GoAT

People who put a monetary value to their time neither understand the concept of acheivement nor deserve its benefit.

You are, by definition, merely a cynic.

Go here. Enjoy.

Your Link is not relevent because THAT dictionary does not contain the word in the context of the computer device. Context of a word is very important.

The American Heritage(R) Dictionary of the English Language
Dictionary.com

I hate to bust your bubble. Viruses are bundles of protiens that hijack living cells. They lack the means to do anything on their own. That is their M.O. It is what they do.

From Dictionary.com:

Virus: pl. viruses
1. a) Any of various simple submicroscopic parasites of plants, animals, and bacteria that often cause disease and that mostly consist of a core RNA or DNA surrounded by a protein coat. Unable to replicate without a host cell, viruses are typically not considered living organisms.
b) A disease caused by a virus.

2. Something that poisens one's sole or mind. Ex. The pernicious virus of racism.

3. (Computer Science) A Computer Virus

"So please stop. It's viruses."

ok, so the plural for "octupus" can be octopuses or octopii.

The people who write up our dictionaries need to get their acts together and create one damn standard for the words already.

The rules of spelling words in English are too convoluted in their current state.

This will probably get modded down as flamebait, but someone has to say it: the plural of "virus" is "viruses." It is not "virii" because that isn't an actual English word.

This will probably get modded down as flamebait, but someone has to say it: the plural of "virus" is "viruses." It is not "virii" because that isn't an actual English word.

Personally, I believe you should plug
this one a little more often!

Indeed, it's 'Quatre-vingt-dix neuf', which is 'Four-twenty ten-nine'... there is no explicit 'times'. (And if you're going to criticise, learn to spell first).

My point is that most languages do addition to express numbers - that's what the 'y' is doing in Spanish. I feel that 'dix-neuf' is pretty much equivalent to the Spanish 'diecinueve', so I suppose your difficulty is purely this 'quatre-vingt' construct...

Perhaps it would help you to look at the reason for this - which, as I say, is pretty much superseded outside mainland France by these 'septante', 'octante', 'nonante' constructs. Since Babylonian times, humanity seems to have had a habit of counting, rather than in hundreds, in sixties. (See 'Number words and number systems' by Karl Menninger, or this site). The link suggests a number of reasons for the popularity of the number sixty, including the two that I was given as a (British) child for the popularity of currently popular non-base ten systems like the foot or the dozen - firstly, that such numbers (12, 60...) maximise the number of divisors - secondly, that there are three joints on each finger, five fingers on each hand, allowing one to count up to 60 by pointing at one of the twelve parts of the fingers of the left hand with one of the five fingers of the right hand...

One can see the importance of the number 12 in Germanic languages, like English, whereas Latin languages actually inherit a simple base-10 system (undecim, duodecim, tredecim...) Germanic languages use 'one left after ten, two left after ten' - many hundreds of years of accent and erosion have simply hidden the meaning of the terms 'eleven' and 'twelve'.

The number 20 also has a special significance in English - it is the score, 'Three score and ten'. In fact, this 'score' is exactly the equivalent to the French 'eighty' that upsets you so much. The French are simply using a somewhat Biblical expression; "Four score".

Base sixty is indeed a little further from English-speaking experience, though, as I have said, it has a remarkably long historical pedigree. However, it was historically in use in Germanic languages, including English, where I believe sixty were given a special name (like 'score' - in the case of English, it was apparently 'shock'). Dictionary.com informs me that the term 'shock' is still in use in some Baltic ports to refer to a set of sixty loose items.

Until very recently, English included a good number of these peculiarities - and still does - English as a second language is full of irregularities, in and outside the language of mathematics. Remember, Americans didn't raise an eyebrow at the term when Lincoln said "Four score and seven years ago"... when the French say it, neither should you.

You are an idiot:

tr.v. savaged, savaging, savages

1. To assault ferociously.
2. To attack without restraint or pity: The critics savaged the new play.

If he is filing a claim in US Federal Court then he is asserting that the US has jurisdiction over the asteroid. If the US has jurisdiction over the asteroid then it must be part of the US. If it is part of the US then I believe the governement would have MANY means of claiming eminent domain, defined at that link:

Main Entry: eminent domain
Pronunciation: 'e-m&-n&nt- Function: noun
: the right of the government to take property from a private owner for public use by virtue of the superior dominion of its sovereignty over all lands within its jurisdiction

Those clever germans. This is really just a warning to their plans to conquer France again. I'm not crazy... Here's the logic behind it:

They purchase AOL.

Change the name to Germany On-Line.

GOL is really the pronunciation of Gaul.

Gaul is an ancient region of western Europe that included northern Italy and France and Belgium and part of Germany and the Netherlands

It all makes sense, I tell you!!

This is good enough for me.
That's the nice thing about the English (or even the American) language. We can embrace and extend. You're within your rights to disagree, but you're still all fucked up.

Boxen is not a word

Its a shame .. I always kept a clear distinction between "Hacker" -- a proficient computer user/programmer vs "Cracker" -- someone who using computers to gain illegal access into something.

However, atleast according to dictionary.com a hacker is now defined as both.. though the cracker definition defines them completely separate from a hacker (infact it goes indepth to distinguish the two) -- too bad it is contradictory to the hacker definition on the SAME SITE.. grr.. no wonder there is confusion.

Its a shame .. I always kept a clear distinction between "Hacker" -- a proficient computer user/programmer vs "Cracker" -- someone who using computers to gain illegal access into something.

However, atleast according to dictionary.com a hacker is now defined as both.. though the cracker definition defines them completely separate from a hacker (infact it goes indepth to distinguish the two) -- too bad it is contradictory to the hacker definition on the SAME SITE.. grr.. no wonder there is confusion.

Interesting to note that Steadicopter claims that their helicopter is unique and there is no other of its kind in the world.

It's not an urban legend, it's a parable. Check here to verify.

The company is real and has a spacecraft currently in orbit.

You may be interested in this.

So they obviously meant "nutritional." I looked up the word in the dictionary and found that it simply means "edible."

I don't mean to nitpick, but here's the definiton of "nutritional":
Nu*tri"tion*al\, a. Of or pertaining to nutrition; as, nutritional changes. Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, (C) 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc

Don't get me wrong, I hate misleading advertising too. There's one Energizer commercial (or is it Duracel?) with the annoying driver yammering away. The passenger with the gameboy's batteries die first, then the cd player guy, while the dude with the mp3 player lasts forever...the implication was he was using the new Energizer batteries, but each of those devices would die in the same order if you used the same betteries in each...

So is my car a robot because it can turn on the lights for me when it gets dark, lock my doors, maintain my speed, etc...

I don't think we saw much labor form HAL. He moved some pods around, opened doors, played chess, killed the crew.

Granted that HAL had a degree of intelligence that my car doesn't. But this isn't the AI Hall of Fame. It's the Robot Hall of Fame.

There are of course a variety of definitions of the term robot. Some of which would include HAL, some which would exclude HAL. Nowhere that I can tell do they define the term. That was my question. It still remains unanswered.

"Where even criminals have civil rights."

this only applies if they have citizenship in the USA. ask the people in camp xray how many civil rights they have.

"When those laws are put together by the dictator's club called the UN, you bet. You know, the place that puts Syria and Libya on the "human rights committee"?"

so... laws and equality are good, unless your not american. makes sense. btw dictator more describes bush; "An ancient Roman magistrate appointed temporarily to deal with an immediate crisis or emergency." can you say sept 11? can you say ignoring flawed recounts?

"Where freedom of speech applies to EVERYBODY, even the ones with unpopular causes. Hint: popular causes don't NEED freedom of speech."

i really want to see hardcore rightwingers/kkk put their differences aside and let abortion advocates go about their business. NEWS FLASH american 'freedom of speech' only applies to popular american opinions. and yes i do believe that the KKK/racism is very popular in the states. you cant accept everyone when your really afraid of them.

"Hint: we're still on our first Republic. France is on their fifth, with intervening Reigns of Terror, anarchy, kings, emperors, and Nazi collaborationist regimes."

so what your saying is that you need to go through all those stages to become a mature country? sorry the rest of the world wont put up with your adolesant phase. grow up now or stop fucking with the rest of the world. actually those things go hand in hand.

"Hint: our popular culture dominates the world. Deal with it."

hahaha... maybe you should go on a vacation sometime... see how the rest of the world treats your culture. the world is not monocultural at all. perhaps american corperations have made it into all corners of the world (im thinking coke). your culture is based on corperations that sacrafice individual rights for market dommance. so i guess yes most of the world is familiar with the general shittiness of american culture.

"Where food is so cheap that even the poorest can (over)eat."

while the rest of the world is blown up or starved by you.

"They're ours to "waste", Saddam-lover."

i agree with you their bush-lover. but GWB does think he can makeit up with oil money and contracts so maybe its like blow a country to bits then rape them for what little money they have left in rebuilding projects. thats the american way for sure!

It's called sarcasm.

Close, but no cigar my AC friend...

Ignorant Exploiter.

GAH! There's no such word! The word is "regardless", not "irregardless"!
I'm not even a native English speaker,

Welcome to English. We've been using this word since the 1920's and will continue to do so.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=irregardl ess

"Unless you're getting MP3s with a cutlass and an eyepatch, it's not piracy."

If you're getting them against the wishes of the copyright holder, it's piracy. Here's the dictionary definition. That's the accepted term, whether it's software, music, or any other copyrighted material. Let's not fool ourselves. Pirating $1,000.00 worth of music is just as illegal as pirating $1,000.00 worth of software or any other copyrighted material. Musicians are not second-class citizens; this is no "some copyright holders are more equal than others" situation.

You make some good arguments but pretending that music piracy isn't really piracy won't help anybody's cause.

You really have to link to something they'll believe, 'cause they sure as hell are stubborn: viruses, not viri.

Remember, viri is the plural of man in latin, and virii isn't even a word.

"You have a very strange definition of the word "earned"."

Actually, he's right on the money.

If you paint the world's most beautiful painting and you sell it for $1MM, you have earned that million. If you somehow manage to sell a million chunks of dried rat turd for a buck a piece, you've still earned a million bucks. And if you have a million dollars in the bank, you have the right to buy a $1,000 suit, to give $1,000 to a homeless puerson, or light ten $100 bills on fire. It's a free market economy.

I swear, the people who create these projects should be beaten:

==

(1) GIMP

gimp - n : disability of walking due to crippling of the legs or feet [syn: lameness, limping, gimpiness, gameness, claudication]

(2) GNOME

gnome - A dwarf; a goblin; a person of small stature or misshapen features, or of strange appearance.

==

Am I to gather that combined they form a small crippled old man? Yessir, those names sure make *me* want to use those products...

I swear, the people who create these projects should be beaten:

==

(1) GIMP

gimp - n : disability of walking due to crippling of the legs or feet [syn: lameness, limping, gimpiness, gameness, claudication]

(2) GNOME

gnome - A dwarf; a goblin; a person of small stature or misshapen features, or of strange appearance.

==

Am I to gather that combined they form a small crippled old man? Yessir, those names sure make *me* want to use those products...

god damn, even after reading the definition of "nonce", I still have no idea what it means..

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=nonce&r=6 7

Troll? Perhaps, though I stand by the statement that it was a boring movie. Both my wife and I watched it, and were tempted to leave early. As I understand it, Frodo needs to destroy the ring. He's still got it, and doesn't appear much closer to getting rid of it. The whole 10000-Orc battle just seemed to be a CG animator's wet dream, and a distraction from the main plot line. The combat was pedantic at best, and cartoonish at worst. It failed to draw me into the storyline, and that left me without emotional interest in the outcome.

I'm not sure I really care about additional footage showing the romantic interest between Aragorn and Eowyn, unless their child grows up to ultimately fight his father and save the Empire. Oh wait, that'd require Natalie Portman and her cardboard performance ... nevermind.