Slashdot Mirror

Yes, and using indentation to implicitly indicate code blocks... and requiring the use of null statements to implicitly imply that this is an empty function.

Explicit: clearly developed or formulated.
Implicit: implied, rather than expressly stated.

It's explained (explicit) in the documentation that indentation is significant.

Indentation explicitly indicates code blocks. There's nothing "implicit" about it. It's part of the language definition, same as keywords, etc. but if it bothers you that much, turn on "show tabs" in your editor of choice, to make it more evident / explicit.

A lot of people don't like the idea of whitespace being significant, because that's not what they're used to. It takes a bit of getting used to, but when you indent code, you are explicitly saying it is at a specific nesting level (as opposed to needing to bracify a series of expressions, or using the implicit nesting of single-line statements in, say, c or c++)

Wrong again:

Source:
http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=zionism

Definitions of zionism on the Web:

        * a policy for establishing and developing a national homeland for Jews in Palestine
        * a movement of world Jewry that arose late in the 19th century with the aim of creating a Jewish state in Palestine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism

Zionism (Hebrew: , Tsiyonut) is a Jewish political movement that, in its broadest sense, has supported the self-determination of the Jewish people in a sovereign Jewish national homeland.[1] Since the establishment of the State of Israel, the Zionist movement continues primarily to advocate on behalf of the Jewish state and address threats to its continued existence and security. In a less common usage, the term may also refer to 1) non-political, Cultural Zionism, founded and represented most prominently by Ahad Ha'am; and 2) political support for the State of Israel by non-Jews, as in Christian Zionism.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Zionism

Zionism (zanzm) [Click for IPA pronunciation guide]

—n
1. a political movement for the establishment and support of a national homeland for Jews in Palestine, now concerned chiefly with the development of the modern state of Israel
2. a policy or movement for Jews to return to Palestine from the Diaspora

Wow, you don't know the different between magnetism and irradiance. Seriously, just look at this and this.

Wow, you don't know the different between magnetism and irradiance. Seriously, just look at this and this.

This is why people [...] imbibe corporate jam. [...] Indie Jam, OTOH, is often about creating a tension

I can't think of a definition of jam that makes sense in this context. Are you talking about sugared fruit preserves in a jar? How does a jar of jam create tension?

As far as Jpeg and PDF go - I did *not* claim they weren't royalty free, I claimed they had patents attached to them.

Then what was your point? If that's what you claimed, it would have been a non-sequitor. The problem people have with H.264 is the royalties, so pointing out JPEG proves nothing. And you should have known the point of contention already. You have reading comprehension problems.

FYI, something isn't patent encumbered just because a patent exists. It's patent encumbered when it is encumbered by a patent. Do I really have to explain this? There's also a word for when something is merely patented. That word is 'patented'. I shouldn't have to explain this.

Anyway, so, having been called on deliberately conflating open source and open standard

I did no such thing. I never treated "open source" and "open standard" as if they were the same thing. Which is what conflating would be. Referring to two different things in the same sentence is not conflating.

and citing yourself that there's no fixed definition (and that royalties are not incompatible with the term) you are not restating that the MPEG LA's terms are "incompatible with open source in general and the GPL specifically" and have left out the open standards part, whereas just a couple of posts ago you were claiming it was also incompatible with open standards too [...]

Jeez, calm down, take a breather, and wait for your emotional outrage to subside. You're not thinking straight. What I was saying is that even if I accepted your position that "open standard" has nothing to do with royalty-free use (which I don't), it actually doesn't help your argument or undermine mine any.

Aside from that, by the principle of charity, you should interpret a person's words by what they probably meant, and not try to twist them into something ridiculous you can launch ad hominem attacks against. If somebody says something that makes sense according to the common definition of a word, you shouldn't attack them because it can be reinterpreted into an incorrect statement. If you said cars had steering wheels, I wouldn't say you were wrong because the compartment of an elevator can be called a car and doesn't have one.

As far as Jpeg and PDF go - I did *not* claim they weren't royalty free, I claimed they had patents attached to them.

Then what was your point? If that's what you claimed, it would have been a non-sequitor. The problem people have with H.264 is the royalties, so pointing out JPEG proves nothing. And you should have known the point of contention already. You have reading comprehension problems.

FYI, something isn't patent encumbered just because a patent exists. It's patent encumbered when it is encumbered by a patent. Do I really have to explain this? There's also a word for when something is merely patented. That word is 'patented'. I shouldn't have to explain this.

Anyway, so, having been called on deliberately conflating open source and open standard

I did no such thing. I never treated "open source" and "open standard" as if they were the same thing. Which is what conflating would be. Referring to two different things in the same sentence is not conflating.

and citing yourself that there's no fixed definition (and that royalties are not incompatible with the term) you are not restating that the MPEG LA's terms are "incompatible with open source in general and the GPL specifically" and have left out the open standards part, whereas just a couple of posts ago you were claiming it was also incompatible with open standards too [...]

Jeez, calm down, take a breather, and wait for your emotional outrage to subside. You're not thinking straight. What I was saying is that even if I accepted your position that "open standard" has nothing to do with royalty-free use (which I don't), it actually doesn't help your argument or undermine mine any.

Aside from that, by the principle of charity, you should interpret a person's words by what they probably meant, and not try to twist them into something ridiculous you can launch ad hominem attacks against. If somebody says something that makes sense according to the common definition of a word, you shouldn't attack them because it can be reinterpreted into an incorrect statement. If you said cars had steering wheels, I wouldn't say you were wrong because the compartment of an elevator can be called a car and doesn't have one.

As far as Jpeg and PDF go - I did *not* claim they weren't royalty free, I claimed they had patents attached to them.

Then what was your point? If that's what you claimed, it would have been a non-sequitor. The problem people have with H.264 is the royalties, so pointing out JPEG proves nothing. And you should have known the point of contention already. You have reading comprehension problems.

FYI, something isn't patent encumbered just because a patent exists. It's patent encumbered when it is encumbered by a patent. Do I really have to explain this? There's also a word for when something is merely patented. That word is 'patented'. I shouldn't have to explain this.

Anyway, so, having been called on deliberately conflating open source and open standard

I did no such thing. I never treated "open source" and "open standard" as if they were the same thing. Which is what conflating would be. Referring to two different things in the same sentence is not conflating.

and citing yourself that there's no fixed definition (and that royalties are not incompatible with the term) you are not restating that the MPEG LA's terms are "incompatible with open source in general and the GPL specifically" and have left out the open standards part, whereas just a couple of posts ago you were claiming it was also incompatible with open standards too [...]

Jeez, calm down, take a breather, and wait for your emotional outrage to subside. You're not thinking straight. What I was saying is that even if I accepted your position that "open standard" has nothing to do with royalty-free use (which I don't), it actually doesn't help your argument or undermine mine any.

Aside from that, by the principle of charity, you should interpret a person's words by what they probably meant, and not try to twist them into something ridiculous you can launch ad hominem attacks against. If somebody says something that makes sense according to the common definition of a word, you shouldn't attack them because it can be reinterpreted into an incorrect statement. If you said cars had steering wheels, I wouldn't say you were wrong because the compartment of an elevator can be called a car and doesn't have one.

My wife works as an architect and we visited a cafe which she had worked on. We met the owner and she complemented him on his uncomfortable seats.

"Complemented". I do not think that means what you think it means.

My wife works as an architect and we visited a cafe which she had worked on. We met the owner and she complemented him on his uncomfortable seats.

"Complemented". I do not think that means what you think it means.

The Preamble doesn't actually give any power. There's a reason it's called a "Preamble":

Preamble:
1. an introductory statement; preface; introduction.
2. the introductory part of a statute, deed, or the like, stating the reasons and intent of what follows.

Until you get to the actual body of the document, nothing in it has any legal force.

Of course, this sort of attack on science and education is stock-in-trade for a group of idiots I've had to take to calling "Retardicans", because they - despite having gained far too much power in the Republican Party over recent times - make actual, reasonable Republicans who are closer to the center look like idiots by association.

In a previous thread we were discussing "Senator Dan Patrick" - Teabagger/idiot extraordaire from the Texas 7th State Senate district. What's his claim to fame? Screaming a lot about how every government service should be less expensive, how there should be no taxes anywhere, and lying a lot. He was caught on his radio show declaring that anything but engineering and medical research is "research nobody cares about" when he was discussing Texas's insane education cuts recently.

He's also been constantly sucking up to, and having his other radio hosts "interview", a major Texas liar by the name of Michael Quinn Sullivan, who loves to trot out the statistic (see also: Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics) that there is "waste" in Texas Education because there is a "1 to 1 ratio" between teachers and "non-teachers" (his definition).

Unfortunately for him, first he's stretching his definitions, then he's outright lying about them.

Sure, Texas has a "1 to 1 ratio" of teachers to nonteachers. How do you get there?

Step 1: count the teachers who have a "homeroom."
Step 2: discount anyone else who teaches or aids students - librarians, substitute teachers, speech therapists, deaf sign language interpreters, English as Second Language teachers, Special Ed teachers - as a "nonteacher."
Step 3: Tutors and study hall monitors: Again, "not teachers."
Step 3: count the lunchlady and school nurse.
Step 4: count the janitors.
Step 6: count the school security personnel (esp. the ones in inner city schools).
Step 6: count the BUS DRIVERS.

When Michael Quinn Sullivan screams about "waste" and says anyone who wants to find "waste" in government should "Just walk down to your nearest administrative complex" - yet "administrative" personnel are less than 4% of the Texas education force. And yet these pathetic retardicans (yes, I have to call them that) will accept his "1 to 1 ratio" screed with zero analysis and then scream about how we need to "cut education funding."

Pathetic. I can't look a real Republican straight in the face any more without wondering how it is they possibly fail to stand up to the Retardicans that have taken over their party.

"Society owes no one anything"

Then want exactly is the point of Society? Why not just pure anarchy? How about you read the definition of Society before you go about casting aspersions without credence. If you are a contributing member of a Society, then that Society DOES owe you something.

Oh you like police protection? How do we pay them? Oh you benefited from that low-interest government subsidized loan to start your business? How did that loan subsidization occur?

The truth is that Society implies a mutually beneficial relationship between its membership. Why not come down from your horse and realize that even you in your, I'm sure, masterful march to success had at one point relied on Society for one thing or another.

1) I'm from the Midwest, so I'm not lumped in with the Pennsylvania comments below
2) Rich is only a noun. Early is a noun, adverb, or adjective.
3) Charge is either a verb or a noun. Past tense conjugation of an English verb is to typically add 'ed'. Charged is also an adjective when describing the state of something.

When used with the helper verb of 'be'.
The phone is charging. (verb, the phone is doing something.)
The phone is charged. (adjective, the phone has the physical state of 100% battery).

Here 'needs' acts as a verb for to have need of; require,
The phone needs charging. (verb, the phone needs to be placed near an electrical source)
The phone needs charged. (adjective, the phone needs the state of 'charged').

Now, when talking about past tense events:
The phone needed to be charged. (verb, the phone, at some point in the past, needed connected to an electrical outlet)
The phone needed charged. (adjective, the phone, at some point in the past, needed more electricity).

1) I'm from the Midwest, so I'm not lumped in with the Pennsylvania comments below
2) Rich is only a noun. Early is a noun, adverb, or adjective.
3) Charge is either a verb or a noun. Past tense conjugation of an English verb is to typically add 'ed'. Charged is also an adjective when describing the state of something.

When used with the helper verb of 'be'.
The phone is charging. (verb, the phone is doing something.)
The phone is charged. (adjective, the phone has the physical state of 100% battery).

Here 'needs' acts as a verb for to have need of; require,
The phone needs charging. (verb, the phone needs to be placed near an electrical source)
The phone needs charged. (adjective, the phone needs the state of 'charged').

Now, when talking about past tense events:
The phone needed to be charged. (verb, the phone, at some point in the past, needed connected to an electrical outlet)
The phone needed charged. (adjective, the phone, at some point in the past, needed more electricity).

1) I'm from the Midwest, so I'm not lumped in with the Pennsylvania comments below
2) Rich is only a noun. Early is a noun, adverb, or adjective.
3) Charge is either a verb or a noun. Past tense conjugation of an English verb is to typically add 'ed'. Charged is also an adjective when describing the state of something.

When used with the helper verb of 'be'.
The phone is charging. (verb, the phone is doing something.)
The phone is charged. (adjective, the phone has the physical state of 100% battery).

Here 'needs' acts as a verb for to have need of; require,
The phone needs charging. (verb, the phone needs to be placed near an electrical source)
The phone needs charged. (adjective, the phone needs the state of 'charged').

Now, when talking about past tense events:
The phone needed to be charged. (verb, the phone, at some point in the past, needed connected to an electrical outlet)
The phone needed charged. (adjective, the phone, at some point in the past, needed more electricity).

Of course, my parent and grandparent posters both meant "major tenets" and not "major tenants" of science. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tenets

Science: Falsifiability lives here

Of course, my parent and grandparent posters both meant "major tenets" and not "major tenants" of science. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/tenets

The United States has made it illegal to create low paying jobs in the United States. How else do you create a low paying job but to take it to a country where the country allows the creation of jobs in that pay category? Or am I reading this wrong?

Ethical b:being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, especially the standards of a profession: It was not considered ethical for physicians to advertise.

American Psychological Association (APA):
ethical. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved February 05, 2011, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical
Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
ethical. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical (accessed: February 05, 2011).
Modern Language Association (MLA):
"ethical." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 05 Feb. 2011. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical>.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE):
Dictionary.com, "ethical," in Dictionary.com Unabridged. Source location: Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical. Available: http://dictionary.reference.com./ Accessed: February 05, 2011.
BibTeX Bibliography Style (BibTeX)
@article {Dictionary.com2011,
        title = {Dictionary.com Unabridged},
        month = {Feb},
        day = {05},
        year = {2011},
        url = {http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical},
}

The United States has made it illegal to create low paying jobs in the United States. How else do you create a low paying job but to take it to a country where the country allows the creation of jobs in that pay category? Or am I reading this wrong?

Ethical b:being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, especially the standards of a profession: It was not considered ethical for physicians to advertise.

American Psychological Association (APA):
ethical. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved February 05, 2011, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical
Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
ethical. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical (accessed: February 05, 2011).
Modern Language Association (MLA):
"ethical." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 05 Feb. 2011. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical>.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE):
Dictionary.com, "ethical," in Dictionary.com Unabridged. Source location: Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical. Available: http://dictionary.reference.com./ Accessed: February 05, 2011.
BibTeX Bibliography Style (BibTeX)
@article {Dictionary.com2011,
        title = {Dictionary.com Unabridged},
        month = {Feb},
        day = {05},
        year = {2011},
        url = {http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical},
}

The United States has made it illegal to create low paying jobs in the United States. How else do you create a low paying job but to take it to a country where the country allows the creation of jobs in that pay category? Or am I reading this wrong?

Ethical b:being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, especially the standards of a profession: It was not considered ethical for physicians to advertise.

American Psychological Association (APA):
ethical. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved February 05, 2011, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical
Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
ethical. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical (accessed: February 05, 2011).
Modern Language Association (MLA):
"ethical." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 05 Feb. 2011. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical>.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE):
Dictionary.com, "ethical," in Dictionary.com Unabridged. Source location: Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical. Available: http://dictionary.reference.com./ Accessed: February 05, 2011.
BibTeX Bibliography Style (BibTeX)
@article {Dictionary.com2011,
        title = {Dictionary.com Unabridged},
        month = {Feb},
        day = {05},
        year = {2011},
        url = {http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical},
}

The United States has made it illegal to create low paying jobs in the United States. How else do you create a low paying job but to take it to a country where the country allows the creation of jobs in that pay category? Or am I reading this wrong?

Ethical b:being in accordance with the rules or standards for right conduct or practice, especially the standards of a profession: It was not considered ethical for physicians to advertise.

American Psychological Association (APA):
ethical. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved February 05, 2011, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical
Chicago Manual Style (CMS):
ethical. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical (accessed: February 05, 2011).
Modern Language Association (MLA):
"ethical." Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc. 05 Feb. 2011. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical>.
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE):
Dictionary.com, "ethical," in Dictionary.com Unabridged. Source location: Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical. Available: http://dictionary.reference.com./ Accessed: February 05, 2011.
BibTeX Bibliography Style (BibTeX)
@article {Dictionary.com2011,
        title = {Dictionary.com Unabridged},
        month = {Feb},
        day = {05},
        year = {2011},
        url = {http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ethical},
}

Okay, here's the dictionary. Although this lacks the background analysis.

Is the term getting abused now? It's debatable. A relevant definition for "application" is "a type of job or problem that lends itself to processing or solution by computer". A "computer application" is the program that does that job and "app" is a shortened form of the term. Certainly a website that does the job can also said to be an "app".

This is a good definition.

Words change, things change. Move on.

PC Pro is wrong anyways. For years most people used the word "program" or "executable" to describe software. On the Macintosh side they were using the word "application" to describe software. With Mac OS X applications started to have the extension ".app" on them. From there it quickly became common to use the shortened term "app" instead of "application". There have also been other segments of the computer industry that used similar terms.

It's hardly a new term, it's been used for years. However, recently it came into a broader use with the iPhone since that broke some of the barriers between Windows users and Mac OS users.

Is the term getting abused now? It's debatable. A relevant definition for "application" is "a type of job or problem that lends itself to processing or solution by computer". A "computer application" is the program that does that job and "app" is a shortened form of the term. Certainly a website that does the job can also said to be an "app".

So like you said, words and meanings change. People shouldn't get too uptight when a word changes meaning slightly.

–adjective
1. closely or significantly related; relevant; pertinent: Please keep your statements germane to the issue.
2. Obsolete . closely related.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/germane

That's more than just an analogy; that's a parable.

Isn't it nice how the orwellian newspeak keeps creeping into the debate?

The legal term is illegal alien. As in:

- Alien: (n) a resident born in or belonging to another country who has not acquired citizenship by naturalization ( distinguished from citizen).
- Illegal: (adj) forbidden by law or statute.

In other words: illegal alien: a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

Isn't it nice how the orwellian newspeak keeps creeping into the debate?

The legal term is illegal alien. As in:

- Alien: (n) a resident born in or belonging to another country who has not acquired citizenship by naturalization ( distinguished from citizen).
- Illegal: (adj) forbidden by law or statute.

In other words: illegal alien: a foreigner who has entered or resides in a country unlawfully or without the country's authorization.

Sounds like the submitter doesn't know the meaning of the word theory?

Read and be enlightened. Esp. definition 2.

Grammar nazi 0 : common sense 1

Good points - much better to prevent a rogue admin than defend against one.

On the backups, I'd also strongly suggest an offsite network backup that operates by "pull" from your main servers, i.e. only the backup server admin can login to the backup server. That way if a rogue admin decides to delete critical data, they can't also delete the backups. The backups will need to go back many versions to guard against someone corrupting data or source code then waiting months or years. For Linux and even some Windows, rsnapshot is a great way to do pull backups using SSH key-based login.

Ultimately this model is still vulnerable to a really talented rogue admin who will simply trojan the SSH server on one of the main servers in order to break into the backup server.

Hence an offsite logging server that captures remote log events from all your servers is important - though really you would need some admins with read-only rights to this as well, and their logins could be captured by trojaning another server or a client system.

For the wider audience (I know you got this right): it's rogue not rouge (French for 'red', English for a type of makeup. This entertaining typo meme has been spreading a lot. The idea of malicious admins with rosy cheeks is entertaining though - would make them easier to spot at least,,,

Good points - much better to prevent a rogue admin than defend against one.

On the backups, I'd also strongly suggest an offsite network backup that operates by "pull" from your main servers, i.e. only the backup server admin can login to the backup server. That way if a rogue admin decides to delete critical data, they can't also delete the backups. The backups will need to go back many versions to guard against someone corrupting data or source code then waiting months or years. For Linux and even some Windows, rsnapshot is a great way to do pull backups using SSH key-based login.

Ultimately this model is still vulnerable to a really talented rogue admin who will simply trojan the SSH server on one of the main servers in order to break into the backup server.

Hence an offsite logging server that captures remote log events from all your servers is important - though really you would need some admins with read-only rights to this as well, and their logins could be captured by trojaning another server or a client system.

For the wider audience (I know you got this right): it's rogue not rouge (French for 'red', English for a type of makeup. This entertaining typo meme has been spreading a lot. The idea of malicious admins with rosy cheeks is entertaining though - would make them easier to spot at least,,,

Okie dokie. I was just making a joke. I am pretty hopeless when it comes to news, let alone international news.

For future reference I think you meant "casualty", rather than "causality"

Okie dokie. I was just making a joke. I am pretty hopeless when it comes to news, let alone international news.

For future reference I think you meant "casualty", rather than "causality"

All those lovely verbs for the taking and you choose the non-word "gotten".

Got Dictionary?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/gotten

Its a word.

orientate is valid, it's British English (though often considered incorrect in the US)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/orientate - variant of orient.

What you are describing is an isolated system, a system that neither exchanges matter nor energy with the surroundings. A closed system would be one that does not exchange matter with the surroundings. The earth is nearly a closed system, but definitely not an isolated system.

Closed system has been defined to be both an energy and a matter boundary for years.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/closed+system

Wikipedia does have a differentiation for isolated and closed systems. This could be new, or a common editor could be editing his non-standard preferences.

- Yes, I am an engineer.

But with a bigger p3n15 and herbal v14gr4 he will get more chicks and therefore have a venerable vulnerability to venereal diseases.

But with a bigger p3n15 and herbal v14gr4 he will get more chicks and therefore have a venerable vulnerability to venereal diseases.

But with a bigger p3n15 and herbal v14gr4 he will get more chicks and therefore have a venerable vulnerability to venereal diseases.

If I'm running a mid size company and I hire an ad agency that gets paid for referrals (and it's a fly by night LLC), I'm really venerable now. I guess the anti-spam crowd will tell me not to hire a fly-by-night, but don't most successful businesses start that way? And how am I suppose to know?

If you realy were venerable then I would hope you would know better than to leave yourself vulnerable to a lawsuit by hireing dodgy contractors.

If I'm running a mid size company and I hire an ad agency that gets paid for referrals (and it's a fly by night LLC), I'm really venerable now. I guess the anti-spam crowd will tell me not to hire a fly-by-night, but don't most successful businesses start that way? And how am I suppose to know?

If you realy were venerable then I would hope you would know better than to leave yourself vulnerable to a lawsuit by hireing dodgy contractors.

Alanis Morissette, I didn't know you posted on slashdot.

Here's the definition of irony, there's nothing about hating Libertarians in my post, that is entirely a projection of your own making.

Secondly, I find libertarianism retarded because it doesn't work in reality. It's based on outdated economic models, ignores the fact that power corrupts and tends to centralise (I.E. a perfectly free market will result in the ideal breeding ground for monopolies) and fails to address how it will actually fix a given issue, yet "libertards" propose that removing restrictions that prevent this is the way to fix problems. It seems I'm supposed to put faith into the free market which has a long history of abuses, Libertarians rarely think about the consequences of their ideology.

Hey dumbass, time to get out that dictionary:

chink in the sense of "a crack or gap," a meaning dating from about 1400 and used figuratively since the mid-1600s.

from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/chink+in+one's+armor

A good analysis, but why the racism? a "chink" in your private property? Not cool. BTW, Sony is Japanese, not Chinese.

chink

-noun
1. a crack, cleft, or fissure: a chink in a wall.

Snuck is fine, no need to add "sneaked" to the tags

The difference is that Lucas coined the term droid. Apple didn't invent the term "app" - it's been a widely used shortening of "application" for years - since the 80's according to Dictionary.com. If Apple had used, for instance, the "Appli Store" (short for application and because it's Apple-y... sorry) then the two situations would be analogous, since I've never before heard someone refer to an application as an appli, but an app? Please.

4) Killed by busses

I'm fairly sure there are quite a few more...

Though it was a close one for Tom Strong.

Actually, Alanis Morissette was using a much more nuanced definition of irony, something a philistine like yourself can't be expected to understand.

reasoned

Either sense would work, but I intended the first.

Since that definition is heavily dependent on another, here you go:

reason

Noun sense 7b and most of the ones from the verb from of the verb are relevant.