Slashdot Mirror

Cloud Computing is such a loosely-defined and heavily abused term that its "true meaning" is almost as open to interpretation as "Web 2.0," and virtualised resources are often included in the definition.

The ever-colloquial Wikipedia states that it "typically involves over-the-Internet provision of dynamically scalable and often virtualized resources" while Foldoc states that it is "A loosely defined term for any system providing access via the Internet to processing power, storage, software or other computing services."

I'm fine with people debating the issue of the term's definition and provenance, even with people saying that one meaning is correct and another isn't, but flatly denying the existence of controversy without bothering to cite your authority is not conducive to anyone's understanding. Please, explain your position rather than simply stating it.

The state of Ohio, for example, banned earlier this year the expenditure of public funds for offshore purposes.

One of the many things that was possible with Governor Strickland, and not Head Banker-elect Kasich.

The only shame is that Kasich got elected as Head Banker, instead of the state retaining Governor Strickland. Now we get a Wall Street banker that compares himself to an East Coast thug. By how he's talking to the media, he's not going to step aside; the Head Banker's simply going to exact revenge.

Oh, yeah, that'll work.

When someone gets $X of "public funding", it's not hard to use it for any purpose you want.

The concept that is outside your abiilty to understand is fungible.

A fact is something that can be corroborated with some form of evidence. Since you provided none, I expressed my opinion of your statement.

I was merely hoping for a citation noting a significant difference. My original post did not claim all schools are identical; it merely compared the difference in quality to the difference in cost and made a conclusion. I apologizing for not providing evidence originally but here it is. If you wish to rebut this claim, please provide references to the contrary.

A fact is something that can be corroborated with some form of evidence. Since you provided none, I expressed my opinion of your statement.

I was merely hoping for a citation noting a significant difference. My original post did not claim all schools are identical; it merely compared the difference in quality to the difference in cost and made a conclusion. I apologizing for not providing evidence originally but here it is. If you wish to rebut this claim, please provide references to the contrary.

A fact is something that can be corroborated with some form of evidence. Since you provided none, I expressed my opinion of your statement.

I was merely hoping for a citation noting a significant difference. My original post did not claim all schools are identical; it merely compared the difference in quality to the difference in cost and made a conclusion. I apologizing for not providing evidence originally but here it is. If you wish to rebut this claim, please provide references to the contrary.

Being from a Big-Name School these days just isn't worth the extra $50,000.

That's an opinion - not a fact. There is a difference you know.

And that is another opinion.

It's an opinion that there is a difference between and opinion and a fact? What a moron you are.

Being from a Big-Name School these days just isn't worth the extra $50,000.

That's an opinion - not a fact. There is a difference you know.

And that is another opinion.

It's an opinion that there is a difference between and opinion and a fact? What a moron you are.

I think it would be appropriate. Each subsequent generation corrected faults found in previous generations, for future generations. More of, favorable traits were maintained, and unfavorable traits were discarded.

    Or the appropriate definitions

evolution

-noun

1. any process of formation or growth; development: the evolution of a language; the evolution of the airplane.

2. a product of such development; something evolved: The exploration of space is the evolution of decades of research. ...

4. a process of gradual, peaceful, progressive change or development, as in social or economic structure or institutions. ...

--Synonyms
1. unfolding, change, progression, metamorphosis.

I'm not justifying anything, I'm only calling BS on your unproven accusations of fraud. Fraud:

deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

Unless you can prove that Verizon deliberately did this there is no "fraud" here. Billing errors != fraud

I'm not saying they deliberately did it. I'm saying that once they realized it was happening, they deliberately allowed it to continue, and did nothing to even warn their customers about the possibility of an overcharge on their bill due to problems with their billing system, but instead just continued to collect the money and say nothing. By any definition you care to cite, that's fraud!

I'm not justifying anything, I'm only calling BS on your unproven accusations of fraud. Fraud:

deceit, trickery, sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some unfair or dishonest advantage.

Unless you can prove that Verizon deliberately did this there is no "fraud" here. Billing errors != fraud

Size has nothing to do with being called an asteroid.

"it has increasingly come to particularly refer to the small rocky and metallic bodies of the inner Solar System and out to the orbit of Jupiter [...] Like most other small Solar System bodies the asteroids are thought to be remnants of planetesimals [...] Traditionally, small bodies orbiting the Sun were classified as asteroids, comets or meteoroids, "

Also called minor planet. Astronomy . any of the thousands of small bodies of from 480 miles (775 km) to less than one mile (1.6 km) in diameter that revolve about the sun in orbits lying mostly between those of Mars and Jupiter.

I've emphasised the bits where it says they can be any goddam size.

If it's not in a planetary orbit, and its not orbiting a planet (moon), then its an asteroid or a comet.

Not quite sure what definition of a "planetary orbit" you're using, but Theia's collision is thought to have occurred because it was sharing Earth's orbit. Sounds pretty planetary to me.

I'd say you are spot on. I think too many people around here forget the roots of the word and only associate it with web context forum as opposed to an actual location or medium that allows the free exchange of ideas. I would suggest it be interpreted as the traditional definition and not the web hijacked (although apt) version.

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

The problem with peanuts is that peanut oil is aromatic. . .

That word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aromatic
–adjective
1. having an aroma; fragrant or sweet-scented; odoriferous.
2. Chemistry . of or pertaining to an aromatic compound or compounds.

That's not really an answer to the question I asked... it merely is a restating of your initial position without any justification whatsoever. I can't help but notice your response seems to be of this type.

I nevertheless would ask you again how you could come to those conclusions, because, as I said, this really did happen where I worked, and I had absolutely no say in the matter. There were, in fact, reasons why they wanted the clients to have editable versions of the documents we sent them, and when I heard this decision to migrate to Office, I inquired about what those reasons were. Now regardless of whether those reasons were particularly good or not does not diminish the fact that they still had some, and I had little choice but to accept the decision. Now how does my relating that incident make me a liar? How does it make me moron? Because I chose to work for a company I didn't agree with on every single little thing? If so, how does it make me a moron that if I had chosen to quit over it, I would have found myself unemployed with nothing to fall back on? Or are you asserting that I'm a moron because I happened to live in a country where, in general, one can't collect any employment insurance if one voluntarily quits their job?

then you need to go out and aggressively demand good manners.

Could you clarify this? It sounds kind of contradictory, my dear sir/madam.

2. making an all-out effort to win or succeed; competitive: an aggressive basketball player.
5. emphasizing maximum growth and capital gains over quality, security, and income: an aggressive mutual fund. [1]

or in other words, not in the violent senses

[1] aggressively. (n.d.). Dictionary.com Unabridged. Retrieved October 16, 2010, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/aggressively

I'd just get all Johnny-5 on their asses, and put the tracker on a another vehicle! A taxi or bus or something, so they have lots of data to look at. And perhaps it'd make finding their gizmo tricky too. Oh, sticking it on a train would be fun, a plane would be best, but no chance of actually being able to get close to a plane! Fuck it - an ocean going ship!

Well, that's me on a watch list. Or moved up on one.

In fact, desperate times call for desperate measures.
/me adds link (or 3)

I'd just get all Johnny-5 on their asses, and put the tracker on a another vehicle! A taxi or bus or something, so they have lots of data to look at. And perhaps it'd make finding their gizmo tricky too. Oh, sticking it on a train would be fun, a plane would be best, but no chance of actually being able to get close to a plane! Fuck it - an ocean going ship!

Well, that's me on a watch list. Or moved up on one.

In fact, desperate times call for desperate measures.
/me adds link (or 3)

I'd just get all Johnny-5 on their asses, and put the tracker on a another vehicle! A taxi or bus or something, so they have lots of data to look at. And perhaps it'd make finding their gizmo tricky too. Oh, sticking it on a train would be fun, a plane would be best, but no chance of actually being able to get close to a plane! Fuck it - an ocean going ship!

Well, that's me on a watch list. Or moved up on one.

In fact, desperate times call for desperate measures.
/me adds link (or 3)

Mods: Read this.

Part of me thinks the interface between you and the device needs to be more ... interactive for lack of a better word.

The word you're looking for is feedback. I took the course in Cybernetics at Reading and the first year pretty much revolved entirely around feedback systems. The online dictionary definition of cybernetics waffles on and on and fails to mention that feedback is a huge part of it. It sort of sideways behind-your-back refers to it using the term "control", but unless you are an engineer and understand the word "control" the way an engineer does, that vague reference flies right past you.

My point is that Apple considers the iPad to not be a computer.

And my point is that doesn't make it true.

Device - a thing made for a particular purpose; an invention or contrivance, esp. a mechanical or electrical one. Appliance - an instrument, apparatus, or device for a particular purpose or use.

The iPad is designed for a specific purpose (to consume media and use apps per Apple's desire)

But it's not designed for a 'specific purpose' at all, it's an 'appliance simulator' - in that it can become an appliance based on the program it is running - the same as a computer, not an appliance itself. To 'do whatever apple wants', is not a 'specific purpose' - unless of course the meaning of the word 'specific' escapes you - any more than a computer has the 'specific purpose' of 'doing whatever the user wants'.

They may not provide a 'boot camp' but i don't see a reason they would do anything to stop alternative OSes, they'll still get a hardware sale - and potential software sales - to those who would otherwise go elsewhere, exactly the same as with Windows on the Mac.

My point is that Apple considers the iPad to not be a computer.

And my point is that doesn't make it true.

Device - a thing made for a particular purpose; an invention or contrivance, esp. a mechanical or electrical one. Appliance - an instrument, apparatus, or device for a particular purpose or use.

The iPad is designed for a specific purpose (to consume media and use apps per Apple's desire)

But it's not designed for a 'specific purpose' at all, it's an 'appliance simulator' - in that it can become an appliance based on the program it is running - the same as a computer, not an appliance itself. To 'do whatever apple wants', is not a 'specific purpose' - unless of course the meaning of the word 'specific' escapes you - any more than a computer has the 'specific purpose' of 'doing whatever the user wants'.

They may not provide a 'boot camp' but i don't see a reason they would do anything to stop alternative OSes, they'll still get a hardware sale - and potential software sales - to those who would otherwise go elsewhere, exactly the same as with Windows on the Mac.

How is it used incorrectly? When an action is the opposite of what would be expected, it is ironic. The newspaper is suing someone, so the last thing I would expect would be then to support them for public office.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony
5: an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected.

I really have to stress how many people come in requesting a service like this. I tried to convince people many times just to go home, plug in their device and simply head to the 'download updates' section, but I would constantly get responses like "I don't have internet", "Its just too confusing" and "I don't want to do it myself". Its idiots like this that create a market for a simple service downloading updates, and Best Buy would be even dumber to turn away potential revenue from customers that are willing to pay for something this simple.

You were doing great right up to this point. What exactly justifies calling people who make an informed decision to purchase a service they aren't comfortable with doing themselves idiots ?

There are a lot of smart people in the world who are computer illiterates. I have one customer who just paid me 2 hours labour to do an initial setup on his new laptop. The usual - take it out of the box, connect to wifi, decrapify, and run updates. He's not comfortable doing it himself, he wants to know that it was done right, and he wants me to be familiar with the system so he can call me if he has problems. He's also a heart surgeon - hardly someone I'd consider an idiot.

No, you need evidence to support your assertion, I don't need any to question it.

My point is that Apple considers the iPad to not be a computer. Again, I don't care either way.You didn't like the way I stated it the first time around; I clarified (APPLE DOESN'T CONSIDER THE IPAD TO BE A COMPUTER AND WILL FIGHT TO KEEP IT RESTRICTED RATHER THAN THROWING IT OPEN TO ANY OS, which is the assertation of the parent of my initial post), you presented nothing to the contrary. Either provide evidence to the contrary or go away. Apple's opinion is the main one that matters, because they control the firmware. Would you care to make a wager on whether Apple will happily allow alternative OSes to iOS on iPads? AGAIN, WHICH IS WHAT IS ASSERTED BY THE POST I REPLIED TO.

What do you believe are the definitions of those terms in this context?

Device - a thing made for a particular purpose; an invention or contrivance, esp. a mechanical or electrical one.
Appliance - an instrument, apparatus, or device for a particular purpose or use.

The iPad is designed for a specific purpose (to consume media and use apps per Apple's desire), as above, as compared to a general purpose computer. Apple will fight tooth and nail to maintain control over this.

No, you need evidence to support your assertion, I don't need any to question it.

My point is that Apple considers the iPad to not be a computer. Again, I don't care either way.You didn't like the way I stated it the first time around; I clarified (APPLE DOESN'T CONSIDER THE IPAD TO BE A COMPUTER AND WILL FIGHT TO KEEP IT RESTRICTED RATHER THAN THROWING IT OPEN TO ANY OS, which is the assertation of the parent of my initial post), you presented nothing to the contrary. Either provide evidence to the contrary or go away. Apple's opinion is the main one that matters, because they control the firmware. Would you care to make a wager on whether Apple will happily allow alternative OSes to iOS on iPads? AGAIN, WHICH IS WHAT IS ASSERTED BY THE POST I REPLIED TO.

What do you believe are the definitions of those terms in this context?

Device - a thing made for a particular purpose; an invention or contrivance, esp. a mechanical or electrical one.
Appliance - an instrument, apparatus, or device for a particular purpose or use.

The iPad is designed for a specific purpose (to consume media and use apps per Apple's desire), as above, as compared to a general purpose computer. Apple will fight tooth and nail to maintain control over this.

Take your pick: Opaque, opaque, opaque, either way, his question is valid and the wikipedia entry on the subject matches not only all online and offline dictionary definitions but also textbook ones. And the answer that human hands are translucent is also valid. So give'm a break?

Yup, and most electronic devices have a power button.
Although, you don't hear many people claiming that their device "features" a power button. No, it is just standard.

Was the door on your house one of the highlighted "features" during the pitch? You would have laughed at real estate agent if they told you the house "features" a door. Of course it "features" a door! You would be befuddled if it didn't. Kind of like how I am befuddled when a computer doesn't "feature" printing or spell check. (Although they do have spell check now)

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feature
-noun
1. a prominent or conspicuous part or characteristic
2. something offered as a special attraction

But anyway, nice arguing with you. I have made my point and will now move on.

dammit , damn you

Irregardless? Reread the word syllable by syllable and tell me how many negations there are in there. I'm quite positive that what you mean is regardless. You're welcome. :)

It's spelt billion.

This article has nothing to do with grains!

That's how us Brits spell "spelled": http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spelt

Time to hit up dictionary.com. Bullion is a term for currency in raw form. Ever seen a pirate movie? Perhaps heard a phrase about "gold bullion". They're installing 35 gold bullion machines, not 35 billion of them. You should learn what words mean before you correct people as it just makes you look like a total fool.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/bullion
1. gold or silver considered in mass rather than in value. 2. gold or silver in the form of bars or ingots. 3. Also called bullion fringe . a thick trimming of cord covered with gold or silver thread, for decorating uniforms. 4. embroidery or lace worked with gold wire or gold or silver cords.

The word they shall all be looking for, is apropos.

APROPOS??
Oh dear, I don't know how you could say that dying while riding a vehicle that he himself was marketing as an easy, safe and smart means of transport should be regarded as a fitting fate.

...oh wait, I see, you were just being ironic.

correction on my earlier post, your link was to the definition of apropos. I used the same site to look up irony

Please look up the definition of irony before posting anything with that particular word in it.

(This especially includes all Sheryl Crow fans)

Thanks in advance.

Um, yes, kindly do. From your link:

5. an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected.

I don't know about you, but the last person I'd expect to drive a Segway off a cliff is the owner of Segway. That's... ummm... well, a classically ironic event .

On a related note: irony is an odd thing, really. Last year I expected a toy bike for my birthday, and got a toy car instead. Not ironic by any definition even though it fits the technical requirement of being the contrary to expectations. There's a certain ... subtlety? ... that's needed for something to be ironic; and perhaps a sense of history as well.

The word they shall all be looking for, is apropos.

Please look up the definition of irony before posting anything with that particular word in it.

(This especially includes all Sheryl Crow fans)

Thanks in advance.

"an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected."

It's ironic, because a multi-millionaire defense contractor is expected to know the danger of cliffs.. right?

Please look up the definition of irony before posting anything with that particular word in it.

(This especially includes all Sheryl Crow fans)

Thanks in advance.

I remember thinking iPod was a silly name when Apple first released the devices. Can you name any consumer electronics devices named "Pod" that preceded the iPod? I can't. In terms of engineered devices, I generally associated pod with aerospace (fuel pod, engine pod, escape pod). But the term pod caught on rapidly, and led to the coining of at least one new word (podcasting). Looking at the definitions for pod, I'd suggest that it's not a word that would pop to mind as the name for a consumer electronics device, except for the fact that it is currently associated with one of the most popular consumer electronics devices. In comparison, "Phone" and "Tunes" are much more natural choices for the corresponding products.

Not really, Pod has been used in that fashion for a really long time. Or at least way longer than Apple has used the word as a part of its trademark.

Harmless: without the power or desire to do harm

If you wear a mask a gloves and don't spend an extended amount of time there, you will suffer no ill effects. That is, it is no harm has been done. It is harmless. Note my statement (read the WHOLE thing):

"Most areas around Chernobyl are pretty harmlessly radioactive unless you a) spend a long time there or b) get some of the radioactive stuff on or in you and it sticks with you for an extended period of time."

Sorry if that seems snarky, but you're not the first person who seems to have suffered from a strange inability to read the whole sentence.

Um, are you that dense?

No, I fully understand what they did, and I find it sleazy. Are your standards really so low that you aren't bothered by companies misleading the public just so they can make more money?

Their INTENT was to craft the announcement in such a way that people would assume they were shutting down.

One of the definitions of lie from dictionary.com: something intended or serving to convey a false impression

That's the thing that was supposed to give them the media coverage (as it indeed did).

Media coverage that they would not have received if they were honest and forthright. In other words, coverage that they did not deserve.

The fact that they technically didn't lie is a fact that should have only be noticeable in hindsight, which appears to have been how it worked.

Well, according to the definition above, they technically did lie. Putting that aside, we're not talking about whether or not they would be found guilty in a court of law, we're talking about whether or not it was ethical. Technicalities don't matter here. What matters is intent, fairness, etc. Their intent was to deceive the public in order to get publicity they didn't deserve in order to increase their profits.

If you want to play with technicalities, you can say absolutely anything you want. Examples:

"I didn't see the red light (because when the light turned yellow I looked away and stomped on the gas)."

"I did not have sex with that woman (it was oral sex)."

"I saw the president dancing around in a pink tutu while stomping on puppies (in a dream I had last night)."

"I saw an alien with my own two eyes (it was on the Twilight Zone)."

If you're OK with companies misleading you to pick more money out of your pockets, that's your business. I'm not OK with it. "Technically it's not a lie" is the sort of excuse I expect to hear from a 5-year-old, not a company that wants my business.

If-you can't-spell a-word, don't-just hyphen-ate it,-use a-dick shon-ary to-look it-up.

Lazy. It's not that hard. "deniability" and "indistinguishable" are the words you were looking for.

If-you can't-spell a-word, don't-just hyphen-ate it,-use a-dick shon-ary to-look it-up.

Lazy. It's not that hard. "deniability" and "indistinguishable" are the words you were looking for.

It clearly benefits humanity in the 2nd & 3rd meaning of the word. As for the 1st, that's a subjective call as to how many people need to benefit, and by how much, before it's a collective benefit.

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

Definition 3 also happens to be the one most people are familiar with. GIMP is a *horrible* name for that reason, and I can tell you that, while not banned, I had a manager look at me and say, "No, we'll just buy Photoshop," one time when I suggested "Why not just grab a copy of Gimp from the web to get the intern working on some of these images you want?"

It does happen.

Waste Management takes your waste away, so Digital Rights Management takes your digital rights away.

Exactly - Manage: to handle, direct, govern, or control in action or use: She managed the boat efficiently.

I believe by "manage" they mean to "keep in check" or "keep under control". Specifically, the philosophy is that copyright is a powerful tool to "protect" content (and I say that both loosely and bitterly), while the Digital Rights Management takes care (a.k.a. "manages") of all those pesky rights consumers would otherwise be entitled to under copyright law. By "managing" users' rights to your content, you ensure they only have what you explicitly allow, and not what the law entitles them to.

Also, by not using terms with a negative connotation (i.e. restrictions), content producers can accurately describe the procedure by which they systematically remove consumers' rights and control spin at the same time, both in laws passed to congress and EULAs. Thus, the term "Digital Rights Management" was born.

An atheist is someone who puts belief in gods on the same level as belief in magic and belief in leprechauns.

Yes, but there's lots of kinds of agnostic. All it means is a state of not knowing. Some agnostics ("hard") believe that god is unknowable while "soft" agnostics believe that there may or may not be a god (some believe that there is, some don't have a firm opinion) and that they don't know god. Some agnostics think that no human knows God, but that he is knowable. And so on.

the only thing you can say for sure is that Xtifr does not know what atheist means — the belief that there is no God. That is substantially different from requiring substantial proof. Indeed, it is a highly unscientific view. The scientific view is to regard God as either unknown, unknowable, or outside the dominion of science, depending on where you stand.

The second definition on the very site you linked to:

2.
disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings.

That is that definition that many atheists actually use. Disbelief is not the same thing as certainty in falsehood, and it's certainly not "unscientific". If it is, every human on Earth is infinitely unscientific (+1 Unscientific for every one of the infinite possibilities that haven't been shown to be part of reality), which is silly and unhelpful.

An atheist is someone who puts belief in gods on the same level as belief in magic and belief in leprechauns.

Yes, but there's lots of kinds of agnostic. All it means is a state of not knowing. Some agnostics ("hard") believe that god is unknowable while "soft" agnostics believe that there may or may not be a god (some believe that there is, some don't have a firm opinion) and that they don't know god. Some agnostics think that no human knows God, but that he is knowable. And so on.

the only thing you can say for sure is that Xtifr does not know what atheist means — the belief that there is no God. That is substantially different from requiring substantial proof. Indeed, it is a highly unscientific view. The scientific view is to regard God as either unknown, unknowable, or outside the dominion of science, depending on where you stand.

I think you missed the usage note on the root word "infer." Infer is commonly understood to mean the same thing as "imply." Look it up: infer. I'm wondering how the statement "Like the rest of Like the rest of the Boomers' children and grandchildren (etc), I've learned from their mistakes as I clean up their mess and learn to survive the aftermath." does not imply that the vast majority of your generation is more environmentally responsible.