Slashdot Mirror

Do you mean a Dyson Sphere? link Actually, scientists have been planning since 1991 to blow up the moon, so maybe the sun is just the next step.

It's common to find somewhat archaic-sounding language (in this case "certain" used as a pronoun) in legal documents.

Its called a Joke, moron.

Its called a Joke, moron.

The "Environmentalists are luddites" argument is stupidity. Environmentalists want balance.

Capitalists have managed to convince you that they are Creating Profit when they pump oil (cut rainforests, build suburbs, etc) and sell it -- in fact, they are not. They are ROBBING the planet

As it stands, we are destroying this vibrant natural world -- all the life on this planet that we managed to live with for millions of years is jeapordized by the the explosion of consumption over the last 3-400 years (for instance).

You may think that Some New Technology will arise to solve our problems -- I dont

The "Environmentalists are luddites" argument is stupidity.

New technology is welcome and necessary -- but ALL the impact of modern life needs to be assessed

When you expell crap into the air from your SUV

Capitalists have managed to convince you that they are Creating Profit when they pump oil (cut rainforests, build suburbs, etc) and sell it

The return received on a business undertaking after all operating expenses have been met.

The act or process of polluting or the state of being polluted, especially the contamination of soil, water, or the atmosphere by the discharge of harmful substances.

They are ROBBING the planet (which we must all share wisely) and telling you its "ok".

To utilize; to make available; to get the value or usefulness out of; as, to exploit a mine or agricultural lands; to exploit public opinion.

everything around you was made in a giant pollution belching factory somewhere

The "Environmentalists are luddites" argument is stupidity. Environmentalists want balance.

Capitalists have managed to convince you that they are Creating Profit when they pump oil (cut rainforests, build suburbs, etc) and sell it -- in fact, they are not. They are ROBBING the planet

As it stands, we are destroying this vibrant natural world -- all the life on this planet that we managed to live with for millions of years is jeapordized by the the explosion of consumption over the last 3-400 years (for instance).

You may think that Some New Technology will arise to solve our problems -- I dont

The "Environmentalists are luddites" argument is stupidity.

New technology is welcome and necessary -- but ALL the impact of modern life needs to be assessed

When you expell crap into the air from your SUV

Capitalists have managed to convince you that they are Creating Profit when they pump oil (cut rainforests, build suburbs, etc) and sell it

The return received on a business undertaking after all operating expenses have been met.

The act or process of polluting or the state of being polluted, especially the contamination of soil, water, or the atmosphere by the discharge of harmful substances.

They are ROBBING the planet (which we must all share wisely) and telling you its "ok".

To utilize; to make available; to get the value or usefulness out of; as, to exploit a mine or agricultural lands; to exploit public opinion.

everything around you was made in a giant pollution belching factory somewhere

I may win, but ad-hominem still isn't a word! Since it's simply a Latin phrase (like the oft abbreviated "id est"), it doesn't need any special puncuation at all.

"vechicals."

"right of way," not "right away."

if you don't know the language, what makes you think other people want to read your posts?

"vechicals."

"right of way," not "right away."

if you don't know the language, what makes you think other people want to read your posts?

What is the meaning of "seruce", I've never heard it before. I tried looking at http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=seruce , but there wasn't an entry. On another note, why does dictionary.com suggest alternative spellings that aren't listed either. wtf?

Umm, do your own research before complaining.

A visit to modern dictionaries show that moot has had several meanings over time, including "Without legal significance, through having been previously decided or settled" and "Of no practical importance; irrelevant."
( http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=moot)

In fact, not only is it in dictionaries in the meaning you disliked, but according to Garner's authoritative "Modern American Usage", the meaning "of no practictical importance" in American English, "is the predominant sense of 'moot'". See the 2003 volume for an extended discussion of this word's transformation over time since its original sense of "arguable".

You may not like it, but some words have several meanings. Use 1 or 2 dictionaries or usage guides before criticizing.

This might help you out in the future

I want a tablet that is about 1/2 an inch thick, has good wireless and lasts for 8 hours on a charge.

If Microsoft hadn't killed Go Corp off for sport ("It wasn't about 'grow the market,' it was about 'block that kick'), we might have had one of those by now. If Jerry Kaplan reads The Reg, I'm sure he's grinning in a fit of schadenfreude.

~Philly

I'm sure you meant to be funny there, but weird really is a verb. ;-)

The MPAA and the like are using "pirate"

Ignore hte evolution of the language all you want, but:

"3. One who makes use of or reproduces the work of another without authorization."

From: Dictionary.com

And it's not like that use is a recent language change.

"They could get a $100bn" stock market value, said one person involved.
"However, all the shares would end up with Aunt Agatha in Des Moines and Uncle Milt in Pittsburgh and there would be no real public market at all."

1. Of, concerning, or affecting the community or the people: the public good.
2. Maintained for or used by the people or community: a public park.
3. Capitalized in shares of stock that can be traded on the open market: a public company.
4. Participated in or attended by the people or community: "Opinions are formed in a process of open discussion and public debate" (Hannah Arendt)

The community or the people. Not the rich or the powerful or the corporate or corrupt.

This kind of attitude is indicative of a major cultural and societal problem: the idea that individuals are somehow not worthy, that they're dumb or inconsequential somehow. That only the interests and concerns of the rich, the powerful, the famous, or the corporate really matter.

This makes me sad and angry.

Compare Apache's webserver market share to that of Microsoft IIS. Compare the number of exploitable vulnerabilities in those products, and the severity of the results.

Compare Sendmail's SMTP server market share to that of Microsoft Exchange. Compare the number of exploitable vulnerabilities in those products, and the severity of the results.

Compare Oracle's (or IBM's) SQL RDBMS market share to that of Microsoft SQL Server. Compare the number of exploitable vulnerabilities in those products, and the severity of the results.

Deduction: Microsoft manages to lead in introducing exploitable vulnerabilities to market segments, with severe results, even in segments where they do not enjoy market share leadership.

Now that's innovation! :)

To be blunt and honest, Microsoft designed and maintained its operating system product(s) in ways that failed to take security (and multiple users, and networking, and...) into consideration for far too long, and now finds itself in the unenviable position of being the only operating system vendor most people have even heard of that doesn't have a properly secure operating system.

-Dan (whose new "cheesegrater" G5 has fewer holes than Windows)

Amateurs.

Amateurs.

Amateurs.

Check this out.

Use of copyright to restrict redistribution is actually immoral, unethical, and illegitimate. It is a result of brainwashing by monopolists and corporate interests and it violates everyone's rights. Copyrights and patents hamper technological progress by making a naturally abundant resource scarce. Many, from communists to right wing libertarians, are trying to abolish intellectual property myths.

Who the hell wrote that? Well, it's better than the RIAA's version. Interesting :-)

See the usage note at the bottom In case you have trouble with that, let me quote for you:

You're missing a period between "bottom" and "In."

You might also want to look up Queue, I do not think it means what you think it means.

Later, chump.

Perhaps the definition of "fix" that is being applied here is "To spay or castrate (an animal)."

Sadly, this bill doesn't recognize spam being so much being "theft of service and harassment" as it recognizes it being "legitimate business opportunity that people are being fradulent about"

That's "cannot," not "can not,"

See the usage note at the bottom In case you have trouble with that, let me quote for you:

"\Can"not\ [Can to be able + -not.] Am, is, or are, not able; -- written either as one word or two."

(Queue Dennis Leary)

Ohhhh, I'm an asshole, asshole, asshole..

The MPAA's use of the word "piracy" is legitimate (see definition 2). The term has been used in this way for roughly two hundred years, originally referring to pirated books.

• Some of the Web pages viewed
• The amount of time spent at some Web sites Response to GAIN Ads
• Standard web log information (excluding IP Addresses) and system settings
• What software is on the personal computer
• First name, country, city, and five digit ZIP code
• Non-personally identifiable information on Web pages and forms
• Software usage characteristics and preferences

1. An agent employed by a state to obtain secret information, especially of a military nature, concerning its potential or actual enemies.
2. One employed by a company to obtain confidential information about its competitors.
3. One who secretly keeps watch on another or others.
4. An act of spying.
   
   for those who are illiteratei among us, please check the third definition.
   Thus I declare that you (Gator) are manufactures and purveyors of spyware onto the masses.

blah blah blah... Words beginning with X are Grecian and will not be defined in this standard English dictionary.

1 Cal (uppercase C) is the amount of heat required to raise the temperature of 1g of water 1 degree celsius

"Irregardless" may be a real word, but it's a stupid one.

D.

pan
v. panned, panning, pans
3. Informal. To criticize or review harshly.

Das Kapital? Free market? In the same breath?

The Wealth of Nations might be a more appropriate work to point to as "the root of much modern economic theory," as opposed to that polemic, "Das Kapital."

Unless you're an unrepentant Marxist, of course.

asymptotic?

Dictionary.com defines terrorism as "The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons." There's nothing in there that says a goverment can't be the organised group.

Explosive New Technology!

Perhaps you should look in a dictionary before boldly proclaiming someone else as ignorant, while cowering as an AC.

See http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=check

10. A written order to a bank to pay the amount specified from funds on deposit; a draft.

Now, who is the ignorant fuck?

This is a hideously bad understanding of what a monopoly is. A lot of people around /. are saying that any company that's A) Big, and B) Retains exclusive rights to its products, is a monopoly, and that's dead wrong.

Here's a nice short definition, courtesy of Dictionary.com:

Monopoly \Mo*nop"o*ly\, n.; pl. Monopolies. 1. The exclusive power, or privilege of selling a commodity; the exclusive power, right, or privilege of dealing in some article, or of trading in some market; sole command of the traffic in anything, however obtained;"

Note that it says "commodity", not "product." The iPod is a product, MP3 players are a commodity, for example. For Microsoft, Windows is a product but operating systems are the commodity, etc.

And even if Apple controlled 95% of the MP3 player market instead of ~35% they have now, they would STILL have to resort to anti-competitive practices to be legally considered a monopoly.

Microsoft all but has a monopoly on the operating system market (Windows), the office software market (Office), the web browser market (Internet Explorer), and lord knows what else...

But again, just because you control a large portion of the market does NOT mean you're automatically a monopoly. And retaining the exclusivity of your products (i.e., the iPod, iTunes, or the G5) also does not mean you're a monopoly, unless it's anti-competitive to do so, and you exert undue control over that market.

Just for the record...

I know this may be shocking for some high-tech folks but I believe he was saying he could listen to the RADIO not to a streaming media service calling itself radio.

In other words, having iTunes does not in any way "limit" his ability to use other means of obtaining music. It merely provides the convenience of obtaining music in a user-friendly environment for use on a limited set of devices.

Interesting paleologism.
However, you may have meant pleonastic
Perhaps your mis-spelling helped you escape superfluousness. :)

One who is zealous; one who engages warmly in any cause, and pursues his object with earnestness and ardor; especially, one who is overzealous, or carried away by his zeal; one absorbed in devotion to anything; an enthusiast; a fanatical partisan.

4. Dictionary, with laser highlighted.

How could they forget the Schnorkel?

Just the name alone should qualify it as a winner..

Heh. Just poking fun. Here you go:

privet.

Do you think that they will sell them at a discount to privet owners?

Imagine roads where 95% of all vehicles were Ladas. Think about how many people would refer to loading up the Lada for a holiday, or getting the Lada serviced, even if the were one of the few who drove a Peugeot.

You made me consider the origin of words, and whether "car" came from a shortened version of "carriage", i.e., the horseless kind. (Also I saw Seabiscuit last night, it wasn't as bad as we thought it would be. ;-)

A search on the origin of the word shows it came from the Welsh "caer" meaning "fortified place", which describes many SUVs... And this one says (under archaic) it was "A chariot, carriage, or cart." Which makes a bit more sense, shortening "cart" by just dropping the "t"...

I would argue that the most popular OS in the world is Linux or Unix in general, judging from how many people like using it as opposed to being "forced" to use Windows just because you can't buy an x86 PC with any other OS. Also judging from the usage in terms of servers (especially HTTP servers), Linux/BSD win hands down.

Allow me to introduce you to my two good friends sarcasm and irony.

Allow me to introduce you to my two good friends sarcasm and irony.

n : a tropical cyclone occurring in the W Pacific or Indian oceans

In reply to "Science is a crutch for most...", I'd like to say this: while you may see it as a crutch, it's certainly one that YOU are using to post your comment ;-) Besides, it's a "crutch" that has enabled mass-communication, mass-transportation, construction of the place you live in, etc, etc, etc.

The reason science is useful and religion isn't is because science takes a "I'll believe it when I see (measure) it", whereas religion takes a completely opposite view: "I'll see it when I believe it" - I would like to state this: anything that allows every possible event to be attributed to the unmeasurable and ungraspable movements of a "higher being" is useless, other than comforting or motivating the believer. By definition, there is no predictive value. The only value it has is that it gives people a broader base on which they can put their already existing prejudiced.

Oh, btw... "is subject to... too" is a fallacy, since it doesn't invalidate your own flaws.

In reply to "Science is a crutch for most...", I'd like to say this: while you may see it as a crutch, it's certainly one that YOU are using to post your comment ;-) Besides, it's a "crutch" that has enabled mass-communication, mass-transportation, construction of the place you live in, etc, etc, etc.

The reason science is useful and religion isn't is because science takes a "I'll believe it when I see (measure) it", whereas religion takes a completely opposite view: "I'll see it when I believe it" - I would like to state this: anything that allows every possible event to be attributed to the unmeasurable and ungraspable movements of a "higher being" is useless, other than comforting or motivating the believer. By definition, there is no predictive value. The only value it has is that it gives people a broader base on which they can put their already existing prejudiced.

Oh, btw... "is subject to... too" is a fallacy, since it doesn't invalidate your own flaws.

Keeping a FreeBSD system up to date is not simple, but it is easy and efficient and if it breaks it's able to be quickly fixed.

• EASY:Capable of being accomplished or acquired with ease; posing no difficulty
• SIMPLE:Having or composed of only one thing, element, or part