Slashdot Mirror

pornography

1. Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.
2. The presentation or production of this material.
3. Lurid or sensational material: "Recent novels about the Holocaust have kept Hitler well offstage [so as] to avoid the ... pornography of the era" (Morris Dickstein).

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=dictionary&q=pornographic


sexual

1. Of, relating to, involving, or characteristic of sex, sexuality, the sexes, or the sex organs and their functions.
2. Implying or symbolizing erotic desires or activity.
3. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction characterized by the union of male and female gametes: sexual reproduction.

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


Look at the definition of Pornography. I think ti is fairly obvious that the girl sent the photos to cause sexual arousal in her boyfriend, or whoever she sent them to.

Also, look at sexual. It does not have to involve a "Sex act", symbolizing erotic desire is sexual. You can do that without faking/performing a sex act.

pornography

1. Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.
2. The presentation or production of this material.
3. Lurid or sensational material: "Recent novels about the Holocaust have kept Hitler well offstage [so as] to avoid the ... pornography of the era" (Morris Dickstein).

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=dictionary&q=pornographic


sexual

1. Of, relating to, involving, or characteristic of sex, sexuality, the sexes, or the sex organs and their functions.
2. Implying or symbolizing erotic desires or activity.
3. Relating to, produced by, or involving reproduction characterized by the union of male and female gametes: sexual reproduction.

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


Look at the definition of Pornography. I think ti is fairly obvious that the girl sent the photos to cause sexual arousal in her boyfriend, or whoever she sent them to.

Also, look at sexual. It does not have to involve a "Sex act", symbolizing erotic desire is sexual. You can do that without faking/performing a sex act.

Offtopic? gawd ... you do know what a shill is, right?

Probably somebody who knows how to spell "sheriff".

From a commonly used online dictionary:

> 4. to have the right or qualifications to: He can change whatever he wishes in the script.

Repeat after me: words often have more than one meaning.

Epic fail.

Sorry to say (am being a Spelling Nazi here) but there is no such word as 'preventative'. You meant 'preventive'.

From http://dictionary.reference.com/dic?q=preventative&search=search

Preventative
Pre*vent"a*tive\, n. That which prevents; -- incorrectly used instead of preventive.

Try to understand: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=cynical
If you would, your post would have been superfluous.

"OMFG! And is "keyboarding" even a word?"

It appears that "keyboarding" is, in fact, a word.

Perhaps the college in question offers a course on using an online dictionary.

Obviously they never met my ex-girlfriend...

Large, and with a long, thin snout, the Hispaniolan solenodon resembles an overgrown shrew

Hardly. If anything, it's the *most* popular. Popularity doesn't necessarily mean that something is liked, but having a lot of people dislike something as in the case of Vista means it's pretty damn popular.

Actually for it to be popular it has to be liked.
Popular - 'regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general: a popular preacher'

Citation: Popular

So vista is not popular.
Notorious might be closer (for a single word description).

Well known is a good phrase to cover it without positive or negative connotation.

You never "loose" anything.

It's an unusual usage these days - at least in American English - but not an incorrect one:
loose ...
-verb (used with object)
20. to let loose; free from bonds or restraint.
21. to release, as from constraint, obligation, or penalty.
22. Chiefly Nautical. to set free from fastening or attachment: to loose a boat from its moorings.
23. to unfasten, undo, or untie, as a bond, fetter, or knot.
24. to shoot; discharge; let fly: to loose missiles at the invaders.
25. to make less tight; slacken or relax.
26. to render less firmly fixed; lessen an attachment; loosen.
-verb (used without object)
27. to let go a hold.
28. to hoist anchor; get under way.
29. to shoot or let fly an arrow, bullet, etc. (often fol. by off): to loose off at a flock of ducks.
30. Obsolete. to become loose; loosen.

for all intensive purposes

I believe you mean, for all intents and purposes

That might be the case, but people still use it, irregardless.

dictionary.com on "irregardless".
Essentially a made up word that somehow made it into the dictionary (read the "Usage Note" paragraph).
On another note, finally a thread I can be a grammar nazi without being completely offtopic. :)

I'll allow it, since it is the closest thing to a coherent argument you have made yet :-)

Tis' better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt. I have no doubt that a response is forthcoming :-)

My GOD man, do I have to teach you the whole English language? Bookmark www.dictionary.com and thern use it on almost every word you use before you post , for the sake of people with a clue everywhere, si vous plait.

Wrong. If you are well informed, you are in a better position to speculate.

"slashdot has not in any manner, way, shape or form managed to link it's entirely rational and informed MS hate with it's facetious "think of the children" cries."

There, I fixed that for you.

You have a 6 digit SlashID, and you don't post at +1 by now?

"If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine...."

Since I don't have any mod points at the moment, I'll have to prepare myself for the challenge to my imagination. How many more years do you think will pass before we start seeing the evidence?

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

If you want to nitpick, at least do it right: it's "virii".

Maybe you should instead.

If you want to nitpick, at least do it right: it's "virii".

Maybe you should instead.

From the Patent Application:

[0068]Charging for the various bundles may be by bundle and by duration. For example, the Office bundle may be $1.00 per hour, the Gaming bundle may be $1.25 per hour and the Browsing bundle may be $0.80 per hour. The usage charges may be abstracted to "units/hour" to make currency conversions simpler. Alternatively, a bundle may incur a one-time charge that is operable until changed or for a fixed usage period. Other pricing techniques are apparent.emphasis added

The key words are "for example", you can't pick on clearly made-up pricing structures when prefaced with the words "for example". You can't really even argue with the concept that some pay-per-usage uses may cost more than others, which is the entire concept this item in the patent application is trying to express.

Pay-per-use has been on the radar of MS and others for a long time, ever since internet access became ubiquitous, enabling remote activation/de-activation of software.

That the original poster felt that a contrived pricing structure used as an example in a patent application was a commitment to pricing structures in the near-term is just ridiculous. I heard that limosuine companies have a pricing model that has customers paying more or less for rides of similar length/duration, based on the car they choose (i.e. sedans rent out for less than stretch limos, whinc rent out for less than stretch "novelty" cars (Hummers, etc.)), bus companies charge more for renting larger busses compared with smaller busses for the same time/distance, etc.

There is nothing here to justify a patent - if this can't get tossed out, I weep for our patent system.

some dictionaries disagree

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/giga
http://www.reference.com/search?q=Giga

BTW, it does come from the greek word gigas, which like the word giant, is pronounced with a soft g

http://www.backyardgardener.com/gardendictionary/gigas.html

No it's not. Do you really think the ticket gets sent directly from the camera, and not a computer system somewhere else?

I didn't say the camera sent the ticket, only that it initiated it.

a tendency to misspeak a lot

I have a tendency to refer to the above as a Lie. I know it's harsh, but the victims here are NOT the recording industries, but average everyday people. And the RIAA's lack of sensitivity is troubling.

Here was a church leadership which injected its organization voluminously and inappropriately into a contemporary political issue. They turned an institution of private religious belief into public political party.

That last statement is simply untrue. What was inappropriate about the Mormon church (or any of the other churches involved for that matter) involving itself in this issue? It was not a purely political issue. The church did not present itself either officially or unofficially as a political party in this matter. The Mormon church does not involve itself as an institution in American (or any other country's) party politics, or specifically endorse any political candidates.

Prop 8 was seen by many as a moral issue that goes beyond simple politics, and moral issues are well within the domain of churches. Religious organisations such as the Catholic church and the LDS church have strong and definite beliefs on marriage, and I believe under American law and constitutional guarantees, have every right to be involved in these type of moral issues on a public basis.

It should also be noted that whilst the Mormon church and other religious groups were vocal in this matter, it is my understanding that members of the black and hispanic communities in California represented a significant percentage of the majority voted against legalising gay marriage. Are these demographics bigoted towards gays?

Personally, I would be more worried by the fact that the Governor of California is determined to overturn the voice of the people. Twice in the last eight years this issue has been voted upon in California, and twice the people have decided by the established democratic process to not support the legalisation of gay marriage. Despite this, the Governor is determined to overturn the will of the people. That should be of greater concern, as that is more likely to damage the political freedoms of Californians that are so cherished by Americans in general.

For the record, I am a member of the Mormon church. I know for a fact that the church is not bigoted towards homosexuals. Like the rest of Christianity, we see the practice of homosexuality as sin, as taught in the Bible. We also see extra-marital sex (adultery) and pre-marital sex (fornication) as sin, and that too is according to biblical teachings. Just because a person or organisation views these practices as sinful, it does not mean that they are automatically bigoted towards the individuals involved. Quite the opposite in fact. Are parents bigoted towards their children because the child behaves in a manner that is unacceptable to the parents? No, they still love the child notwithstanding they might deplore the behaviour.

Bigotry is defined as "stubborn and complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from one's own." The Mormon church's position towards homosexuality is not bigotry. I would point you to the transcript of an interview on the LDS Church's position on homosexuality. This lengthy interview was given by two very senior leaders of the Church, and is found here. Make of it what you will, but this is not a bigoted position.

Those that choose homosexuality (and it is purely by choice) are still free to live that lifestyle according to the laws of the land. The fact that this minority wanted to make a change to the law, and the majority opposed it doesn't change the fact that they are still free to live the way they choose.

I do agree with you however that if a person strongly disagree's with the teachings of the church or religious group to which they have associated themselves, then by all means they should probably discontinue that association. Staying to merely avoid social difficulty, and not living according the principles upon which membership of that church is based in nothing

Just to clarify, "be not yoked with unbelievers" is in reference to marriage and marrying someone who is not a believer. Which is probably good advice for anyone of any religion (or lack thereof). Marrying someone who holds different fundamental beliefs to you is going to cause difficulties.

Since this is slashdot, I feel obliged to include a definition of marriage as for most readers it will be a foreign term, and for those to whom it isn't - hi mum.

The plutocracy? Are people still using that term?

It's a perfectly useful term. If you don't want the term used, reform campaign finance and make our nation a representative republic again.

plutocracy
ploo-tok-ruh-see]
-noun, plural -cies.
1. the rule or power of wealth or of the wealthy.
2. a government or state in which the wealthy class rules.
3. a class or group ruling, or exercising power or influence, by virtue of its wealth.

I'd say that describes the US perfectly. Don't like it? Change it.

You may also learn that a company is not your surrogate parent, who's job it is to care about your every concern in life.

Use your condescending tone on a younger man, boy.

You create the wealth your employer aggregates. He owes you a living, period. Not your parent, a fair return for your labor.

If you work forty hours a week and can't support a family, you're being fucked over. Screwed. Cheated. Stolen from. Scammed.

What's a "decent" living?

Food, shelter, transportation, clothing, beer. There are workers who don't even have shelter.

If the poor have more money, do you really think they'll start making good decisions or just blow the money and be right back where they were 6 months later?

They're not where they are because of bad decisions, they're where life has put them. "There but for the grace of God go I".

I see you've had at least 12 years of marxist doctrine shoved at you.

You don't have a clue, son. I voted for Nixon. If you think Dickens was a Marxist you live in a fantasy world. I hope reality never hits you with an unforseen catastrophe, because you'd never make it in the real world.

"Operawhat?"

op-er-a - noun
1. an extended dramatic composition, in which all parts are sung to instrumental accompaniment, that usually includes arias, choruses, and recitatives, and that sometimes includes ballet. Compare comic opera, grand opera.
2. the form or branch of musical and dramatic art represented by such compositions.
3. the score or the words of such a composition.
4. a performance of one: to go to the opera.
5. (sometimes initial capital letter) an opera house or resident company: the Paris Opera.

You're a dipshit who doesn't know that words have meanings. Find out what "Joe the Plumber" did for a living, and compare with the definition of the word "plumber". plumber.

Doctor implies a degree, accountant does not. You can have a job description or make a living as an "accountant" with no license - it's a description of a job, not a description of a degree. Now - a CPA is a different matter. I suggest you learn to use "words", they do have meanings both literal and implied.

No, he _was_ a plumber. I think you should go look up the definition of plumber in the dictionary, and compare with how he made his living. He wasn't a licensed plumber.

Here, I'll help you out: plumber.

Casualty is a term limited to not just describing dead people but also wounded people. reference.com definitions of casualty.

Anyway, I was among the tens of thousands of people who witnessed the 'streak of light' shortly after 10pm, from the Auckland Domain where the annual Christmas in the Park concert had just finished. The streak lasted less than what felt like 10 seconds, made no discernible noise, and looked about as bright than a nearby firework (of which there were heaps 5 minutes prior at the end of the concert).

In fact, at the time I only half thought it was a 'shooting star' as it could've been part of the fireworks. The show had finished, and people were packing up, so I wondered if it was something for the kids (Ooh, hey kids, look, Santa has flown away). But after reading this article, it must have been the same meteorite. Very cool!

One thing that always bothered me about Steamboat Willie was the fact that Mickey, Minnie, and Pete appeared to be sentient(well, as much as niggers are, anyway) but all of the other animals were just dumb farm-beasts.

you keep using that word. i do not think it means what you think it means.

malice is the word you didn't need to invent.

Strange then that maliciousness didn't trip the spelling checker. Can one not give more weight to the adjectival sense of an adjectivized noun by renounifying it?

Now "adjectivized" and "renounifying" on the other hand, they are flagged as not being words. But it did keep me from throwing the extra "i" in adjectivial.

Regardless of the disputed origins of the term, the common usage refers to conformity, and in 40+ years I've never heard it used in reference to "stretching boundaries". From dictionary.com:

82. toe the line or mark,
a. to conform strictly to a rule, command, etc.
b. to shoulder responsibilities; do one's duty:
He tried hard to toe the line on the new job.

So is "el" in "eldorado" and "al" in "alcohol" and "algebra", but you still keep it in. See the usage note at http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hoi+polloi

Actually, zoetrope is descriptive and apt.

Will these feminizing chemicals mean women who were already women end up with larger... tracks of land?

<pedantic>
tracts of land
</pedantic>

If you're going to be a grammar nazi, learn some grammar. "Stupider" is perfectly acceptable usage.

If you're going to be a grammar nazi, learn some grammar. "Stupider" is perfectly acceptable usage..

Why does it matter whether it happens daily, monthly or yearly? The fact that it happens is the point, so leave the pointless hyperbole out of it.

What? Your original statement was,

But say I want to watch a video.

Okay, we're saying you want to watch a video.

Oh, odd, it won't play. Something about a "codec". What the hell is a codec?

The implication there is that it happens whenever you try to watch a video. But now you claim you didn't mean what you literally said (if we're watching a video, it won't play). So okay, if it only happens occasionally, you call tech support and let a professional deal with it, much like you do when your car breaks down. The car analogy still stands. What is so hard to understand about this for you?

Perhaps by 'simpler' you mean 'easier to use'.

Well, yeah, I would pretty much be using the generally accepted definition of the word "simple" there.

1. easy to understand, deal with, use, etc.: a simple matter; simple tools.

I'm not exactly sure what you think the word should mean, but if you look at the context of my posts, it should be fairly obvious what I'm talking about. Read the part where I explicitly said they are getting more technically complex, but easier to operate, thus defining exactly what I meant by "simple", and not what you wanted me to mean.

Of course computers today can do more than those of yesterday. I stated that computers, like cars, have gotten simpler and so more people are able to use them than they were before. And when both cars and computers require maintenance, as they invariably do, there is nothing wrong with not doing it yourself. You responded by saying my analogy was bad, because computers are not getting simpler. I pointed out that just as cars have become simpler, computers have too, so the analogy was perfectly valid. Even if you believe "simple" means something other than what I defined it to mean, the analogy is still valid because cars and computers have gotten "simpler" in the exact same way (more technically complex, yet easier to use). Then you seemed to state that modern computers are somehow harder to use than the computers of 20 years ago, a claim that is laughable on its face.

Y'know, if you turn around and start running now, you might just be able to catch up with the point that flew over your head.

Y'know, I honestly don't think you have a point. You just want to quibble about a dictionary definition. Unfortunately, it turns out you're flat out wrong about that. Sorry.

The word would be danegeld (or you might prefer this definition better).

Pray does not exclusively refer to requests made to an invisible man in the sky.

The dictionary definitions of fact center around truth - either that which is proven true or is said to be true. The implication when using the word "fact" is that it is something that truly happened or exists. Check the dictionary.

Roget's Thesaurus lists the following as the antonyms (opposites) of "fact": fabrication, lie... which have as one of their synonyms, "falsehood".

So basically... there were no facts included in your post.

And no one quite knows what it means to a generation of 2-year-olds to have slightly pixelated versions of their grandparents as regular fixtures in their lives.

Sure they do. It means their grandparents are getting Alzheimer's.

Pixelated: bewildered, confused; slightly insane; also called pixilated

They were written. Here's the definition of better in case it wasn't clear to you before now.

bet-ter
-adjective, compar. of good with best as superl.
1. of superior quality or excellence: a better coat; a better speech.
3. of superior suitability, advisability, desirability, acceptableness, etc.; preferable: a better time for action.
8. to a greater degree; more completely or thoroughly: He knows the way better than we do. I probably know him better than anyone else.
10. to increase the good qualities of; make better; improve: to better the lot of the suburban commuter.
11. to improve upon; surpass; exceed: We have bettered last year's production record.

Word History: The words check, chess, and shah are all related. Shah, as one might think, is a borrowing into English of the Persian title for the monarch of that country. The Persian word shah was also a term used in chess, a game played in Persia long before it was introduced to Europe. One said shah as a warning when the opponent's king was under attack. The Persian word in this sense, after passing through Arabic, probably Old Spanish, and then Old French, came into Middle English as chek about seven hundred years ago. Chess itself comes from a plural form of the Old French word that gave us the word check. Checkmate, the next stage after check, goes back to the Arabic phrase shah mat, meaning "the king is dead." Through a complex development having to do with senses that evolved from the notion of checking the king, check came to mean something used to ensure accuracy or authenticity. One such means was a counterfoil, a part of a check, for example, retained by the issuer as documentation of a transaction. Check first meant "counterfoil" and then came to mean anything, such as a bill or bank draft, with a counterfoil -- or eventually even without one.

The correct definition of the word "evolve" is "change slowly." Check dictionary.com: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolve

Notice that only the one definition, specifically marked as relevant in biology, is along the lines of what you're thinking. Saying spring evolves into summer is perfectly correct.

We use language very casually, and sometimes it comes back to bite us. Or lets journalists exploit it to get their articles posted on Slashdot.

soccer /skr/ [sok-er] -noun a form of football played between two teams of 11 players, in which the ball may be advanced by kicking or by bouncing it off any part of the body but the arms and hands, except in the case of the goalkeepers, who may use their hands to catch, carry, throw, or stop the ball.

Hi! It looks like you're unfamiliar with a dictionary. Do you want some help with that? </clippy>

No its worse than that. They are using "evolved" to mean changed. Its like saying that spring evolves into summer, or a newspaper of paper mache.

Exactly. The modern use of evolution to describe the biological process of descent with modification is in fact a rather poor use of language. Dictionary.com defines 'evolution' as "any process of formation or growth," which is clearly an appropriate description in this case. Furthermore, Darwin himself avoided using the word 'evolution' to describe his theory, because it was such a poor description.

Of course the Slashdot headline is, as usual, meant to deceive, but then what would we have to talk about if the headlines and summaries were reasonable and accurate?