Slashdot Mirror

He may have been a good Physics teacher, but he should stay away from linguistics. Deceleration is indeed a word.

Shut down, eh? Yeah, right--what's the real story they're trying to hide??

[hint]

It's the second definition of open. Open is the correct word here. They never said it was "Open Source(tm)", just openned to China.

I really doubt they will share the source with China. Sharing implies China would have the same rights as Microsoft. It's more likely they will open it to them. Saying Microsoft "opens source" to China, doesn't mean Open Source(tm). Just because it's part of a trademark doesn't change the meaning.

I really doubt they will share the source with China. Sharing implies China would have the same rights as Microsoft. It's more likely they will open it to them. Saying Microsoft "opens source" to China, doesn't mean Open Source(tm). Just because it's part of a trademark doesn't change the meaning.

If you don't know the difference between precision and accuracy, we can't have a discussion.

Agreed

I know I shouldnt feed the trolls but here are the definitions of precision and accuracy:
Precision
1) The state or quality of being precise; exactness.
2a)The ability of a measurement to be consistently reproduced. (Which applies to pc-clocks. - my comments.)
2b)The number of significant digits to which a value has been reliably measured.

Accuracy
1) Conformity to fact.
2) Precision; exactness.
3) The ability of a measurement to match the actual value of the quantity being measured.

Now that that is cleared up, there are a gazillion links for this search query on google...Read them all.

If you don't know the difference between precision and accuracy, we can't have a discussion.

Agreed

I know I shouldnt feed the trolls but here are the definitions of precision and accuracy:
Precision
1) The state or quality of being precise; exactness.
2a)The ability of a measurement to be consistently reproduced. (Which applies to pc-clocks. - my comments.)
2b)The number of significant digits to which a value has been reliably measured.

Accuracy
1) Conformity to fact.
2) Precision; exactness.
3) The ability of a measurement to match the actual value of the quantity being measured.

Now that that is cleared up, there are a gazillion links for this search query on google...Read them all.

big on Enthusiastic about; partial to

Just because SF writers deal with religion in their stories doesn't mean that the like it. Quite a few of the greats, such as Asimov, Clarke, Sagan, and Adams, are well-known atheists and agnostics.

You can't take a device, and patent its application to a new situation.

Oh, you mean like taking a device such as, say communication (about an item for sale, maybe), and patenting its application on a computer network? Hmm, I think you may have a point there.

And before you get all uppity about the definition of device, here's one:
1. A contrivance or an invention serving a particular purpose
which I certainly think that communication falls under.

Somebody didn't do their homework...

"Xerography" is a legitimate word, and according to Merriam-Webster's, it has been since 1948. Xerox can punt.

pray that the big depredator which is in front of you isn't hungry right now

Dictionary.com defines depredator as "One who plunders or pillages; a spoiler; a robber." I don't think that's what you meant, but it's oddly fitting in this context anyway.

"Google" might be a trademark, but "google" isn't.

...because there's a significant difference. "Google" will only exist as anything but a proper noun if Google doesn't defend its trademark, as it's quite appropriately doing now.

In my opinion, the American Dialect Society should ignore this mickey mouse complaint.

(you can shoot me now)

How about we throw you out a window instead? Suits your name better...

Actually, "google" is just "googol" spelled incorrectly.
Wish I could google a better link...

Actually, it looks like an Afghan is a native of Afghanistan and a blanket. An Afghani, in contrast, is a native of Afghanistan and their unit of currency.

D'oh!

Actually, it looks like an Afghan is a native of Afghanistan and a blanket. An Afghani, in contrast, is a native of Afghanistan and their unit of currency.

D'oh!

Possum seems correct enough.

Regional Note: Since English is a language that stresses some syllables and not others, weakly stressed syllables, especially those preceding strong stresses, are dropped at times. This process, called aphesis when it occurs at the beginning of a word, is more common in regional American dialects than in the more conservative Standard English, which tends to retain in pronunciation anything reflected in spelling. Although many American dialects feature aphesis, it is most famous in the dialects of the South, where it yields pronunciations such as count of for (on) account of, tater for potato, possum for opossum, and skeeter for mosquito.

""We ask that you help us to protect our brand by deleting the definition of "google" found at wordspy.com or revising it to take into account the trademark status of Google." (emphasize mine)."

Google isn't being unreasonable here. Look up 'kleenex' at dictionary.com and you get (trademark) added to it. Check it out:

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

I haven't skimmed the comments yet, but those of you who have your pitchforks raised can lower them.

my bad, Dictionary.com says "Originally a Trademark" - which I took to mean "used to be a trademark".

No.

When Apple first formed as such, they were involved in a trademark dispute with the British recording label Apple (the Beatles label, BTW). They settled because Apple Computer would be in a different business. (For more, search on 'Apple+sosumi'.) Furthermore, it has also been resolved that 'Apple' can not be used as a trademark when selling the actual fruit.

Google does NOT mean to search for something online. Check here or your closest paper dictionary. In the vernacular it has come to mean search in much the same way xerox has come to mean copy documents, kleenex has come to mean tissue, and scotch tape has come to mean transparent tape.

Ergo, if another internet search engine uses the term 'google' it would be as much as fault as a copier company advertising with the word 'xerox'. The fact that 'Word Spy' has noted that it is now in common use to mean search is irrelavent.

it seems reasonably likely to me that 'Google' is constructed from 'go ogle'

Except that it's not. Although I question the spelling of the source word "googol -- it apparantly has a mathematical background, but I was aware of the terms "google" and "googleplex" for "an absurdly large number" long before Google came about. I suspect my source is indeed HHGTG, since I read it at an early age. Repeatedly.

Google is between a rock and a hard place, as Xerox, Kleenex, and many others have been. Part of the danger of becoming immensely successful is the loss of trademark if it becomes a household term. And while they may be able to succeed in the courts here, the reality is that it is a household term now and is being used as such.

it seems reasonably likely to me that 'Google' is constructed from 'go ogle'

Except that it's not. Although I question the spelling of the source word "googol -- it apparantly has a mathematical background, but I was aware of the terms "google" and "googleplex" for "an absurdly large number" long before Google came about. I suspect my source is indeed HHGTG, since I read it at an early age. Repeatedly.

Google is between a rock and a hard place, as Xerox, Kleenex, and many others have been. Part of the danger of becoming immensely successful is the loss of trademark if it becomes a household term. And while they may be able to succeed in the courts here, the reality is that it is a household term now and is being used as such.

In the US, you've got the poor, middle class, rich. I fall in the poor range. Now you may have a different definition for poor, I gather that would be "barely surviving."

Poor, clearly there are numorous ways in wich to interpret 'poor'. Your interpretation is just as correct as mine.

Go away.

There was nothing conventional about it when the work was done... it is quite unreasonable to ask for examples that are less than a couple of decades old

That's great. A few decades ago, they did something unconventional. But what have they done now? I don't care if the policies have or have not been implemented, what are they doing now to question the established standards? You linked me to osdn.com, btw, but I found the proper site and checked it out. While it is interesting stuff, and pertinent to our existence, it doesn't try to answer the Big Question. The freshest thing on that website was "Equilibrium Selection and Public-good Provision: The Development of Open-source Software", although that has already been beaten to death.

A theoretical prediction was made that if more money was spent on R&D then the economy would grow at a faster rate.

You initially said: One of their predictions was that intellectual goods were being under-produced. You cannot predict that which is currently happening, that is not in step with the definition of the word. You could, however, hypothesize. Although my knowledge of economist-speak is limited, so maybe in their world you can use 'predict' in such manner (but if so, they are wrong).

Different issue - increased spending on research produced more growth - whether changes in IP laws helped is another question entirely.

If you were speaking of increased spending, and not IP law, then why did you say: Sure it now looks like they were too enthusiastic about strengthening intellectual property law, but in other ways their predictions have turned out to be accurate. Did you throw that in there specifically to confuse me? [insert comment about how dumb I am for not understanding]

Perhaps what you meant to say was: True, economists have promoted the strengthening of IP laws beyond reason. But this doesn't mean they aren't doing anything useful. A few decades ago, they encouraged greater expenditures in public and private R&D, which increased our output of intellectual goods. This is considered one of the primary causes of our recent economic growth.

If that was the case, I wouldn't disagree. I would wonder why you mentioned it, however, because I wanted to know what they have done recently to challenge conventional wisdom, not how they created it a few decades back. And for chrissakes, do you really need a degree in economics to conclude that increased R&D results in increased IP goods? I learned that in StarCraft...

At first I thought, what is Taco doing? Using 'tho' for though? Just seemed like bad grammar (and no, I'm not a grammar nazi. Hell, i'm the reason they invented grammar and spell checks). Then I checked. Accoriding to the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Ed., it's a variation on how to spell though. To me, tho just looks stupid.

There exists a subset of the population who will murder people with knives. Should we thus outlaw knives? Your argument is specious.

Here's the definition of victim . You may want to study it. A victim is someone who was wronged. Both parties to a drug deal are not wronged -- they both have desires and both parties' desires are met: the dealer receives cash or other consideration, and the purchaser receives their drug of choice. Again, this could be alcohol, tobacco or caffeine if it makes it easier for you to understand.

The problem, I will state again, with outlawing victimless behaviors is that it encourages people to report, sometimes falsely, others' behavior. Great for getting revenge on someone, just call the cops and give an anonymous tip saying they're a drug dealer. Of course, we've always had "crimes" that we could use that way, going all the way back to Salem and the Witch Trials. At least today you can prove you're not a drug dealer.

I will ignore your personal attack. I feel sorry for you.

Extravagant, complex, or bizarre, especially in ornamentation

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

Definition of PRINCIPLE

Definition of PRINCIPAL

Definition of PRINCIPLE

Definition of PRINCIPAL

I thought you guys were Michiganders???

gander n. A male goose.

But what about the Michigeese?

"Not only are the two groups not-mutually exclusive, but both tools are used akimbo."

"Akimbo" means with your hands on your hips and elbows out point outward.
definition

You do realize you're a bigot, right?

I've read through your arguments below, and there's a point that neither party seems to be making.

To answer your original question: this hybrid organism lacks the capability to reproduce with either parent, yet it can reproduce with other plants that share its mutation. By chance its DNA mutated enough to change its reproductive options. No other organism has these specific reproductive options. This mutation is not as glamorous as a firebreathing thistle, but by definition this is all it needs to be something new to taxonomists.

See the definition of species, provided by Dictionary.com. If you disagree, switch disciplines and take up your point with Oxford, Webster, and the general field of evolutionary biology.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mainstrea m

mainstream: The prevailing current of thought, influence, or activity

What about a 3% market share is screaming "mainstream" to you??

While your at it, you might want to look up Foe's List in the dictionary. Because you just bought a one-way ticket to my foes list.

Representing the prevalent attitudes, values, and practices of a society or group

Your principal should have taught you how to spell principle if the teachers couldn't manage it.

Your principal should have taught you how to spell principle if the teachers couldn't manage it.

how can eBay (yes, /. editors, that's how it's spelt, how can you not get that much right?)

i hope your gross misuse of the english language was intentional, otherwise you certainly look like quite the moron.

I look like quite the moron? Why would that be? Because I know the correct conjugation of the verb "to spell" that's needed here?

Why don't you check out dictionary.com before you post next time. Here's the link that you're after: definition of spelt. And, for your additional benefit, here are a few examples courtesy of Google, found simply by searching for the exact phrase "how a word is spelt": Google results.

What were you thinking? That the correct usage would be "how it's spelled"? Sad that you're so quick to criticise when your knowledge is so fragile. Oh well, at least you were logged in as an AC, so at least you've learnt (yes, learnt, not learned) something without suffering too much personal embarrassment.

Sorry, that link is at this url.

Look at this and this you frappen idiot.

Look at this and this you frappen idiot.

...to garnish an Oscar...

I'll have my Oscar with a nice sprig of oregano, please. If you could garner some for me.

"Garner" still isn't quite right in this context, but at least it looks like an editor has glanced at the text before posting it.

There is more than one definintion of hacker. It seems no matter which definition people use, someone gets upset. Yet so many other words have multiple definitions and people learn to live with it.

Folks, it's platypuses and viruses. "Platypus" is derived from Greek, and "virus" is derived from a fourth declension noun, whose nominative plural in Latin ends in "-us", not "-i".

Folks, it's platypuses and viruses. "Platypus" is derived from Greek, and "virus" is derived from a fourth declension noun, whose nominative plural in Latin ends in "-us", not "-i".

Websters defines piracy as:
The unauthorized use or reproduction of copyrighted or patented material: software piracy. See it here.

I don't think the problem is with people making copies per se. The problem has always been and always will be with distribution. If you want to rip your favorite cd into mp3s and make 100 copies of those mp3s, theres nothing fundamentally wrong with that, but as soon as you start distributing (for sale or otherwise) someone else's copyrighted work, you are pirating, plain and simple.

I agree that the current laws do not apply well to cyberspace and digital mediums, but under current law, people who do this are pirates, and are breaking the law. Until someone changes the law, that's the way it will be.

I think maybe you'll this link helpful in your reading.

I can't believe that nobody else has wondered why anyone would want to garnish an Oscar. Would it look particularly good with a sprig of parsley? I presume the poster meant garner.