Slashdot Mirror

So, the US is a democratic republic (if one overlooks the sham presidential election of 2000 - bring in the Belgians!). Contrast this with a constitutional monarchy as we have in Australia - we are not a republic, since our head of state is a monarch (much to my chagrin and embarrasment), but our government is elected by the people, so we are a democracy.

From Dictionary.com:
Democracy :
1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.

Republic :
1. a) political order whose head of state is not a monarch and in modern times is usually a president.

What's a cursory web search? Beats me. I do know, however, what a dictionary.com search is.

Profanity

proÂfanÂiÂty P Pronunciation Key (pr-fn-t, pr-)

n. pl. proÂfanÂiÂties

The condition or quality of being profane.

Abusive, vulgar, or irreverent language. The use of such language.

According to the definition, most everything on this site is profane.

Relax, and try not to get offended by every motherfucking thing you see on this goddamn shithole of a site.

The US is BOTH a republic (because Dubya is an American), and a democracy (because the head of state is elected by the people, loosely speaking)

Don't be confused by the fact that your political parties are the Republicans and the Democrats...

The US is BOTH a republic (because Dubya is an American), and a democracy (because the head of state is elected by the people, loosely speaking)

Don't be confused by the fact that your political parties are the Republicans and the Democrats...

In litteraly no time you can throw together a complex schema [...]

definition of chat room from dictionary.com ... or for those too lazy to click ...

A site on a computer network where online conversations are held in real time by a number of users.

Sorry, you lose.

You neglect to mention those pre-existing sources are non-government. If the government must collect data from these so called pre-existing sources, that sounds like gathering to me.

And I just love your solution. Don't participate? You want everyone who realizes this is a draconian law to go live out in the woods? Put the bong down and join reality, if you wouldn't mind.

Bitch about the liberals all you want. It doesn't hurt me one bit. I'm not a liberal. I don't get your rant against liberals in response to complaints about the TIA. It's quite obvious that you believe that TIA is harmless and the grand conspiracy lies from the far left, not the reality that everybody, no matter what party you belong to, is negatively impacted because of the creation of the TIA.

...When they see this stuff, they start to form opinions...

Since when is this such a bad thing? My parents (highly religious) took this parenting attitude about many things where "forming your own oppinions" were "MetaModded down" as it were. I feel it was one of the most controlling, oppressive actions they could have taken. See below...

...Without guidance, these opinions can be off base...

n 1: a personal belief that is not founded on proof or certainty; "my opinion differs from yours"; "what are your thoughts on Haiti?" [syn: sentiment, persuasion, view, thought] ---- (Shamelessly plagerized from here)

The excessive forceful application of a person (or parents)opinion on another is a real shame... My ability to think and form opinions for myself is my most treasured properties. Though my opinions my be offbase sometimes, so can yours. let your kids THINK!

-dave-

It could be that Microsoft plans on killing VPC, and doesn't want there to be any way to run Windows on Mac.

Q: Yes, but why?
A: Palladium.

Microsoft is really into this whole Palladium thing. It provides a way to secure future revenue streams once Windows' competitors pass it by on the technology front. They just need to provide a 'secure platform' and convince/acquire the big media players into only allowing their IP to be available on Palladium.

Palladium relies on trusted hardware. If you have a bunch of trusted 'hardware' out there running emulated in software it's suddenly much easier to peek at. This is bad for media sales, and Microsoft revenue.

So, might as well cut off any such efforts before they get off the ground. Who do you think has more lawyers, FWB or Microsoft? My vocabulary word of the day today is barratry.

From this perspective, the iTunes Music Store is the biggest poke in the eye Steve could have stuck to Bill, and puts them on the defensive like nothing else could. The iTunes Music Store is actually strategically necessary for the future viability of Mac OS X and Apple. It's real purpose is to preempt Palladium. I have to admit, that's pretty frikkin clever.

Wow. I guess they want the crowd that thinks xp and 2000 is to cheap.

Perhaps this is just a typo on your part, but here's today's lesson anyhow:

The word 'too' is the word for 'more than enough', the sense you're trying to use: ...the crowd that thinks xp and 200 is too cheap.

Knowing where to use 'to' (like that sentence!) *is* tough, dictionary.com lists no more than sixteen definitions. The easiest way to tell the difference may well be to remember when to use "too" and "two", and then use "to" everywhere else.

Keep Typing!

-GrammarFairy

"Here's your magic fairy dust."

And here's a link to everyone-else-but-the-FCC's opinion on this.

Aren't they really a trade orgination which represents the combined/similar interests of its members (who are conventional businesses).

A corrupt and monopolistic business to be sure,

Aren't those big 5 labeles a cartel. To be a monopoly, you really need to be one company controlling a market (eg, Microsoft). But the market is controlled by a group of 5 labels who collude to control the market.

but they are out to make money and survive.

Maybe you can't blame them, but plenty of others do.

Their "survive" strategy (so far) has largely been to attempt to stifle new technology... same basic story as radio and the recordable cassette tape. Short sighted then, short sighted now.

On the "make money" front, the highly unfavorable contracts that artists have no option but to sign, and the widespread crooked accounting they practice hardly gives them the moral high ground.

Aren't they really a trade orgination which represents the combined/similar interests of its members (who are conventional businesses).

A corrupt and monopolistic business to be sure,

Aren't those big 5 labeles a cartel. To be a monopoly, you really need to be one company controlling a market (eg, Microsoft). But the market is controlled by a group of 5 labels who collude to control the market.

but they are out to make money and survive.

Maybe you can't blame them, but plenty of others do.

Their "survive" strategy (so far) has largely been to attempt to stifle new technology... same basic story as radio and the recordable cassette tape. Short sighted then, short sighted now.

On the "make money" front, the highly unfavorable contracts that artists have no option but to sign, and the widespread crooked accounting they practice hardly gives them the moral high ground.

...it isn't in my best self-interest to be a conservative or liberal right now.

Fortunately, some of us are willing to put equality and justice before our "best self-interest."

I'm a college student. I make bugger-all income. I pay my taxes, without whining that somebody else is getting a bigger refund than me. Why? Because he's paying more than me. The "working poor" that certain Democrats are trying to give "refundable tax credits" to do get on my nerves--why should they be entitled to a refund if they're not paying any taxes? How can it even be called a refund? My dictionary says this about the word "refund:" "To give back, especially money." How, exactly, can giving these people, who paid no taxes, checks possibly be considered a refund? They're not getting any money back! Handout, yes; refund, no.

And why should my tax dollars go to fund the "undernourished child of a single working parent?" Why is she (most single parents seem to be women, though there are exceptions) single? Odds are by her choice. Fact is, it takes two parents to raise a child properly; those who argue otherwise don't read studies by developmental psychologists. And, while we're on the subject of her decision to have a child (yes, she chose to do it; between the choice to have sex, and the strongly-protected option of an abortion, and adoption, and a few other possiblities, but mostly the choice to have sex), why did she choose to have a kid when she couldn't afford it? If she has to work full-time to support the kid, who's raising him? Perhaps she should have considered that before putting herself in that position. I believe in personal responsibility: you make a bad decision, you get yourself into a hole, well, you'd best be prepared to drag yourself out of it. I don't understand, absolutely cannot fathom, why her poor decision-making process is my problem.

BTW, I'm against the tax breaks for "yacht fuel," as you describe. However, I'd like to know where they came from--perhaps you can cite some sort of law, perhaps a portion of the tax code? I know there are all kinds of government subsidies out there--Ted Turner got half a million bucks for his ranch--and I'm opposed to them. People should learn to stand on their own two feet, and that applies equally to the rich as well as the poor.

And, just for the record, why should corporations be taxed? You do know that corporations never pay taxes, don't you? They don't--they just collect them. If a company needs to make x dollars to stay in business, and the gov't imposes a tax on them, they'll raise prices to make up the difference. Just passing the cost along to the consumer. Also consider that the dollar is being taxed when the consumer spends it on a product, when the company receives it as income, when the employee receives it as personal income...when is enough? How many times should it be taxed in a single cycle? But it doesn't matter at what stage the tax occurs; it's always the consumer paying it.

Perhaps that's why I'm a registered Libertarian. In any case, my principles are a lot stronger than my own self-interest. Perhaps if more people's were, we'd have fewer problems.

Learn to use the language properly or don't use it at all.

there
At or in that place: sit over there.

they're
Contraction of they are.
Contractions are where we combine two words together with a ' mark. examples: don't won't can't they're isn't. The ' is also used to imply posession:
Sue's John's Sams'

their
Used as a modifier before a noun: their accomplishments; their home town

Learn to use the language properly or don't use it at all.

there
At or in that place: sit over there.

they're
Contraction of they are.
Contractions are where we combine two words together with a ' mark. examples: don't won't can't they're isn't. The ' is also used to imply posession:
Sue's John's Sams'

their
Used as a modifier before a noun: their accomplishments; their home town

Learn to use the language properly or don't use it at all.

there
At or in that place: sit over there.

they're
Contraction of they are.
Contractions are where we combine two words together with a ' mark. examples: don't won't can't they're isn't. The ' is also used to imply posession:
Sue's John's Sams'

their
Used as a modifier before a noun: their accomplishments; their home town

the most viscous slashdotting imaginable


Viscous is certainly one way to describe what happens to a slashdotted server...

Yes, Windows gets 17% higher TPC-C... with twice as many processors. The word "Pyrrhic" immediately springs to mind.

Consider the ugly language in the LotR trilogy. It is even more impacting, imaginative, quotable even. The reason cussing is also called vulgar is because it is the commoner's way of talking. The movie would not be nearly so successful, were it to take the well-trodden path of words for excrement, sex or prostitution, anatomy, and technical terms of animal husbandry. Of course, in that scenario, it would have been directed by Adam Sandler.

The script of Gollum's acceptance speech is indicative of the LotR group's ability to fit the audience well. You know very well they would have had a similar version that wasn't so geared to the childish/modern-day-peasant mindset of "cussing is cool/entertaining."

For deleting expletives, I prefer the content reworked with a redub. It doesn't break the sound up so much (you can still hear it, though). Granted, hearing anyone utter "well, if that's the way you feel, you can kiss my eye" sounds stunted, discordant, and incongruous, yet still I find it far less hackneyed than the terse iterations of a narrow jumble of words whose only agreed definition is "offensive language."

Since I don't waste my money on paid broadcast TV (the general idea was to *not* have commercial advertisements), was the MTV award show censored when on MTV? Since when did movies have anything to do with Music Television, anyway? If they are censoring on MTV, that would suggest they are having ratings problems and can't compete with the Discovery Channel and the like... How could they compete with "Shark Week" anyway? I mean, what kind of reality show would that be? Oh wait. Running Man. If they televised the regular exodus out of Cuba, I'm sure that would come close, complete with sharks.

barÂraÂtry

1. The offense of persistently instigating lawsuits, typically groundless ones.

2. An unlawful breach of duty on the part of a ship's master or crew resulting in injury to the ship's owner.

3. Sale or purchase of positions in church or state.

What he's doing is illegal, he should be fined into oblivion or sent up the river to be married to some guy named Bubba.

And, while we're at it, let's get the RIAA up on charges too.

-R

etymology is the word you meant to use. Entomology is the study of insects.

Easy mnemonic: Entomology, think ants. Works for me anyway.

Peta should be advocating the fact that animals are sentient beings, not a renewable resource. And for those pathetic scientists who even created such a device should deserve death at the least, using their own stupid machines.

Where did you use the "=" sign there? You said scientists who create a technology should be put to death "at the least" (I'm wondering what your "most" would be...). You did not say the users of the machines should be put to death, you said the creators. That's like suing Ford for a drunk driver killing your relative. (Pssst... it's not equal.)

I didn't insult your education, call you a fool, or discuss your drug use or lack thereof. I merely said you were being hypocritical, and you didn't answer my question: do you eat vegetables for which you must kill the organism in order to produce the food? (Carrots, potatoes, beets?)

Unlike animals, if an apple is broken off the tree, first, it doesn't feel pain (no nervous system) and second, it can REGROW the apple i.e. regenerate.

But carrots, potatoes and beets cannot regenerate; you kill them by harvesting them.

And just because a plant doesn't have a nervous system doesn't mean that you're not removing a life force from the Earth when you kill plants. They have a Kirlian aura which you're snuffing out. And check out PEVA, who argue that plants and even single-celled organisms can feel pain ("Some single cell organisms are known to react and withdraw (run!) from heat. Is this not a single-cell pain reaction without a complex human-like nervous system? How can a single cell make this determination without having a 'brain'?")

Oh, and as for religious references? Let's take Genesis:

"26": And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

Now, from Dictionary.com, dominion is:

1. Sovereign or supreme authority; the power of governing and controlling; independent right of possession, use, and control; sovereignty; supremacy.

Combining the two: God gave us supremacy over the animals. The power to govern, control, possess, and use them for our purposes.

And if you follow a more scientific track, we evolved as omnivores and the few people who I have seen attempt a vegan lifestyle ended up emaciated, weak, pale, and short. (Yes, this is anecdotal evidence.)

I'm not trying to pick a fight -- but you obviously are, given the wording in the great-grandparent post:

Go ahead, FLAME ME. But it's the truth.

pedantery, ahoy!

That's pedantry. But I'm sure you knew that.

1) A safeguard, especially one viewed as a guarantee of the integrity of social institutions: the Bill of Rights, palladium of American civil liberties.

2) A sacred object that was believed to have the power to preserve a city or state possessing it.

I believe that city is called Microsoft.
"Bill of Rights"... whaaaahahaha.
---
At any rate, I have only one more word to say about Palladium. You can read all about that word here

(emphasis added by me)

It reminds me of when I was 13 years old, and was at the stereo store waiting to plunk down some of my hard earned paper route money for a duel cassete deck (these things used to be expensive), and the sales person went on a long lecture about how if I used this to make copies of my freinds tapes I'd be ruining it for everyone, and if I did that, someday you wouldn't be able to buy duel tape decks.

I guess the two decks in the player could have been in a prearranged, formal combat between two persons, usually fought to settle a point of honor, but I highly doubt it. I'm sure you meant it was composed of two usually like or complementary parts instead. Too bad you didn't say that.

(emphasis added by me)

It reminds me of when I was 13 years old, and was at the stereo store waiting to plunk down some of my hard earned paper route money for a duel cassete deck (these things used to be expensive), and the sales person went on a long lecture about how if I used this to make copies of my freinds tapes I'd be ruining it for everyone, and if I did that, someday you wouldn't be able to buy duel tape decks.

I guess the two decks in the player could have been in a prearranged, formal combat between two persons, usually fought to settle a point of honor, but I highly doubt it. I'm sure you meant it was composed of two usually like or complementary parts instead. Too bad you didn't say that.

effect: Something brought about by a cause or agent; a result. definition

affect: To have an influence on or effect a change in definition

you wanted affect.

effect: Something brought about by a cause or agent; a result. definition

affect: To have an influence on or effect a change in definition

you wanted affect.

Sirrah is an old term that's rarely used today.

Sirrah: \Sir"rah\, n. [Probably from Icel. s[=i]ra, fr. F. sire. See Sir.] A term of address implying inferiority and used in anger, contempt, reproach, or disrespectful familiarity, addressed to a man or boy, but sometimes to a woman. In sililoquies often preceded by ah. Not used in the plural. ``Ah, sirrah mistress.''
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sirrah

antisocial behavior

Conduct indicating indifference to anotherâ(TM)s person or property; criminal behavior, dishonesty, or abuse are examples. In DSM-IV, childhood or adolescent antisocial behavior (in contrast to antisocial personality disorder, etc.) are included as âoeother conditions that may be a focus of clinical attention.â American Psychiatric Association definition

anÂtiÂsoÂcial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nt-sshl, nt-)
adj.
Shunning the society of others; not sociable.

Hostile to or disruptive of the established social order; marked by or engaging in behavior that violates accepted mores: gangs engaging in vandalism and other antisocial behavior.

Antagonistic toward or disrespectful of others; rude. Dictionary.com Definition

aÂsoÂcial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-sshl)
adj.
Not social: âoeBears are asocial, secretive animalsâ (David Graber).

Avoiding or averse to the society of others; not sociable: âoeIt's not that you're so asocial, but a man who likes people doesn't wind up in the Antarcticâ (Saul Bellow).

Unable or unwilling to conform to normal standards of social behavior; antisocial: âoecrime, riots, drug use and other asocial behaviorâ (Derek Shearer).

Inconsiderate of others; self-centered.

Dictionary.com Definition

Remember, always watch your back with psychiatrists and their ilk, they are out to get you.

antisocial behavior

Conduct indicating indifference to anotherâ(TM)s person or property; criminal behavior, dishonesty, or abuse are examples. In DSM-IV, childhood or adolescent antisocial behavior (in contrast to antisocial personality disorder, etc.) are included as âoeother conditions that may be a focus of clinical attention.â American Psychiatric Association definition

anÂtiÂsoÂcial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (nt-sshl, nt-)
adj.
Shunning the society of others; not sociable.

Hostile to or disruptive of the established social order; marked by or engaging in behavior that violates accepted mores: gangs engaging in vandalism and other antisocial behavior.

Antagonistic toward or disrespectful of others; rude. Dictionary.com Definition

aÂsoÂcial ( P ) Pronunciation Key (-sshl)
adj.
Not social: âoeBears are asocial, secretive animalsâ (David Graber).

Avoiding or averse to the society of others; not sociable: âoeIt's not that you're so asocial, but a man who likes people doesn't wind up in the Antarcticâ (Saul Bellow).

Unable or unwilling to conform to normal standards of social behavior; antisocial: âoecrime, riots, drug use and other asocial behaviorâ (Derek Shearer).

Inconsiderate of others; self-centered.

Dictionary.com Definition

Remember, always watch your back with psychiatrists and their ilk, they are out to get you.

I Am Not A Lawyer...

I Am Not Justin Quitting His Job...

I felt it was a part of the peculiar /. ambience (yes, it's also spelt ambiance, and yes, spelt is in fact an appropriate spelling of the particular conjugation of "spell") that i wanted to carry on. Frankly, i think it's sort of a pleasant habit, and i've seen a lot of past threads where an acronym gets used in responses. I'm not arrogant enough to believe that mine is anything but a silly little use of the slashdot habit, but because of that, i didn't think anybody would make it such a big deal.

IAAMIT= (I am a minister in training) and i think the man in question did the right thing... (oh, i think i just opened this up for minister of information jokes) /me ducks and runs for the bunker...

sarcasm - n. - A cutting, often ironic remark intended to wound.

Thanks though. See here for the truth.

blackmail.

I would say the market consolidation is Fascism.

Not in the You are a [Fascist/Nazi/Commie] name calling most often seen when these labels are thrown around. Most people throw around Fascism as a dirty word, not knowing what the attributes of Fascists. Fascisism (as I understand it), is a union of like minded individuals who agree to allow no dissension in the pursuit of the common cause.

Here is what , says.

1. often Fascism
1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

Word History: It is fitting that the name of an authoritarian political movement like Fascism, founded in 1919 by Benito Mussolini, should come from the name of a symbol of authority. The Italian name of the movement, fascismo, is derived from fascio, "bundle, (political) group," but also refers to the movement's emblem, the fasces, a bundle of rods bound around a projecting axe-head that was carried before an ancient Roman magistrate by an attendant as a symbol of authority and power. The name of Mussolini's group of revolutionaries was soon used for similar nationalistic movements in other countries that sought to gain power through violence and ruthlessness, such as National Socialism.

Would you like your ass for here or to go?

First, America is converting from a Democracy to a Capitalistic state. The difference between the two is in a Democracy the government is of, by, and for the people. In a Capitalistic state the government is out to make as much money as it can, however it can. Even if it has to trample over all of your rights.

Where did you come up with this? Capitalism and democracy are not mutually exclusive ideologies, nor are they even related. Capitalism has nothing to do with the "government out to make as much money as it can". It is quite the opposite -- the government gets out of the way and allows the people to make as much money as they can.

Second, in an international economy (the One World economy bs) you do not matter at all so long as everything is evenly divided up among all of the countries around the world. Thus, it is no longer what is good for America is good enough for the world - it becomes what country X says is what everyone has to do. Look at Iraq to see what happens when you don't do what you are told.

This is unintelligible babbling. Iraq's violation of 17 UN security counsel resolutions banning weapons of mass destruction has nothing to do with the international economy. And since when have all countries around the world evenly divided up anything??

We in America are also moving towards a police state. If you don't believe me just look at the Patriot Act.

Typical Slashdot rhetoric about the Patriot act. Name one significant, noticeable right that you have been denied from as a direct result of the Patriot Act. You might want to pick up a history book and see what it really is like to live in a "police state". Now, I'm all for limiting the rights of the Government, but I'm also for limiting a crazy mans ability to hijack a plan and fly it into a heavily populated building.

Here in my own state (the president's home state) all of the democratic reps left the state because of what the republicans were doing.

What the Republicans were doing was a completely legal and appropriate redistricting plan, something that the Democrats did a few years back when they had control of the state legislature.

Justice is blind but Americans are bound hand and foot by arbitrary laws put in place by companies, corporations, and international interests so they can profit and we, the people, can lose. Before the multi-billion dollar corporations were around things were sane, balanced, and easy to understand. Now they are not.

Things have never been "sane, balanced, and easy to understand". Are you kidding me? Life will always be challenging regardless of how many multi-billion dollar companies there are. Cain didn't kill Abel because he was interested in his stock in a billion dollar company.

Sleep if you will, but the time for sleep is past. Hide if you will, but you will be found. Aren't you done with being afraid?

What is your solution? Don't you get tired of complaining all the time? You just wrote several paragraphs complaining about everything you don't like, but didn't offer a single suggestion or alternative. What do you suggest? Do you want to make it illegal for companies to make money? That would work really well. Do you want everybody with money to have to give it to the poor? Hmmm. That sounds like an incentive to succeed. What do you suggest?

It is far too easy to sit back and point out everything you think is wrong. It takes real intelligence and leadership to actually do something about it.

First, America is converting from a Democracy to a Capitalistic state. The difference between the two is in a Democracy the government is of, by, and for the people. In a Capitalistic state the government is out to make as much money as it can, however it can. Even if it has to trample over all of your rights.

Where did you come up with this? Capitalism and democracy are not mutually exclusive ideologies, nor are they even related. Capitalism has nothing to do with the "government out to make as much money as it can". It is quite the opposite -- the government gets out of the way and allows the people to make as much money as they can.

Second, in an international economy (the One World economy bs) you do not matter at all so long as everything is evenly divided up among all of the countries around the world. Thus, it is no longer what is good for America is good enough for the world - it becomes what country X says is what everyone has to do. Look at Iraq to see what happens when you don't do what you are told.

This is unintelligible babbling. Iraq's violation of 17 UN security counsel resolutions banning weapons of mass destruction has nothing to do with the international economy. And since when have all countries around the world evenly divided up anything??

We in America are also moving towards a police state. If you don't believe me just look at the Patriot Act.

Typical Slashdot rhetoric about the Patriot act. Name one significant, noticeable right that you have been denied from as a direct result of the Patriot Act. You might want to pick up a history book and see what it really is like to live in a "police state". Now, I'm all for limiting the rights of the Government, but I'm also for limiting a crazy mans ability to hijack a plan and fly it into a heavily populated building.

Here in my own state (the president's home state) all of the democratic reps left the state because of what the republicans were doing.

What the Republicans were doing was a completely legal and appropriate redistricting plan, something that the Democrats did a few years back when they had control of the state legislature.

Justice is blind but Americans are bound hand and foot by arbitrary laws put in place by companies, corporations, and international interests so they can profit and we, the people, can lose. Before the multi-billion dollar corporations were around things were sane, balanced, and easy to understand. Now they are not.

Things have never been "sane, balanced, and easy to understand". Are you kidding me? Life will always be challenging regardless of how many multi-billion dollar companies there are. Cain didn't kill Abel because he was interested in his stock in a billion dollar company.

Sleep if you will, but the time for sleep is past. Hide if you will, but you will be found. Aren't you done with being afraid?

What is your solution? Don't you get tired of complaining all the time? You just wrote several paragraphs complaining about everything you don't like, but didn't offer a single suggestion or alternative. What do you suggest? Do you want to make it illegal for companies to make money? That would work really well. Do you want everybody with money to have to give it to the poor? Hmmm. That sounds like an incentive to succeed. What do you suggest?

It is far too easy to sit back and point out everything you think is wrong. It takes real intelligence and leadership to actually do something about it.

The Jihad comment for taking the word of the month (you know, terror, evil people, so on, so forth), and appling it to something that doesn't relate in the least.

Actually the definition of jihad means holy war or spiritual struggle against infidels.

This makes it doubly silly... all right, triply silly... in addition to the base silliness of the case, they appear to be suing IBM for code leaks (which they haven't even identified to us, let alone proven they own) which occurred before IBM got involved. Here, D'ohl is implying that they knew about the alleged contractual problem years ago and did nothing about it because there was nobody involved at the time who was a plump enough lawsuit target; this is tacit agreement with the violations. If I were IBM, I'd be asking my lawyers to go for summary dismissal with prejudice. If I were the judge I'd do SCO for contempt of court.

Then (as IBM) I'd delegate a couple of bright kids to go through our own IP, looking for stuff SCO might have violated, and while they were busy among the files, go and have a quiet chat with Novell about the rights to Unix. Then publicise the results and watch SCO's stock flatline.

You'll have to agree that, with the advent of the web, it's entirely possible for manufacturers to sell directly to consumers. Anyone between the two, including retailers, has to be considered extraneous, no matter how useful their services.

Adorer in french has the same meaning as to adore in English: it refers to worship and devotion. It can also mean "aimer beaucoup" - which can then mean either "to love a lot" or "to like a lot", depending on context. Aimer is a very context- and intonation-dependant verb.

Just remember that talent is something you develop, it's not something you're born with. You want to work there? Start climbing the steps.

Uhm, bullshit.

You know, that's why they call it "talent", as in, "A marked innate ability, as for artistic accomplishment."

I'm a decent artist. It's 50% talent, 50% work. I've found I have a cartoonist style, but I can't do still life. No matter how hard I try, I know guys who could beat me when they were in junior high school.

Play the hand you are dealt with, accept what you can't do well and do it mediocre and enjoy it.

You know what happens when everybody believes they have a talent and jumps on the "Fun and Money Bandwagon"? .com

THERE IS NO SUCH WORD AS PRIVILIDGE. IT'S PRIVILEGE. learn how to spell, ass-sucker.

your mother is very disappointed in you. she mentioned that whlist licking my asshole.

THERE IS NO SUCH WORD AS "PRIVILIDGE". IT'S "PRIVILEGE". thanks for coming out though. jackhole.

back to fucking your mother now.

Ever hear of irony? Look it up!

Considering that "uncertainty" is a noun, and "doubt" is both a noun AND a verb...no. In the verb context, doubt clearly has a different meaning than does uncertainty.

I don't see a great degree of differentiation.

Good job with your little addition to FUD.

I would think that asking people to express themselves clearly would decrease uncertainty.