Slashdot Mirror

Actually, but both affect and effect can be used as either a verb or a noun. However, you are correct that the GP used the wrong one.

Actually, but both affect and effect can be used as either a verb or a noun. However, you are correct that the GP used the wrong one.

Okay, now you refer to copying a file as "stealing". Therefore you are probably delusional due to your irrational faith in capitalism and there is no point trying to discuss this with you. What can I say? Game over, get well soon.

I'm sick and tired of people trying to argument that pirating is not stealing. Get real, copying a copyrighted file for which you do not have a license is stealing. Let's have a look at the many definitions of the verb "to steal" and see if one of them apply:

1. to take (the property of another or others) without permission or right, esp. secretly or by force.

Will ya look at that. The very fucking first definition. Pirating is taking a intellectual property and copying it without permission. Case closed.

These are not US citizens; therefore, the Bill of Rights + Constitution do not apply. These are not uniformed soldiers of a sovereign state; therefore, Geneva Conventions do not apply. But we treat them far better than any other military would treat them.

I believe that you have just argued that all National powers have the right to detain non-citizens. So if you are ever abducted (special rendition is something you seem to agree with) to another country and held in a "not concentration" camp with access to wet wipes and a religious book of your choice, you have no cause for complaint. Even if you are held there for years without charges being brought, whilst regularly water-boarded and deprived of toilet paper unless you are in need of a reward...

Of course, I suspect that you believe that the US should follow different rules to the rest of the world (in which case, you are a bigot, but that's another matter).

American Heritage Dictionary, first definition of noun "censorship": "the act or practice of censoring" http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=censorship&ia=luna

American Heritage Dictionary, first definition of verb "censor": "A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable." http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=censor&ia=ahd4

It says nothing about "government".

If you want to make some hair-splitting point here, please cite your sources.

American Heritage Dictionary, first definition of noun "censorship": "the act or practice of censoring" http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=censorship&ia=luna

American Heritage Dictionary, first definition of verb "censor": "A person authorized to examine books, films, or other material and to remove or suppress what is considered morally, politically, or otherwise objectionable." http://dictionary.reference.com/cite.html?qh=censor&ia=ahd4

It says nothing about "government".

If you want to make some hair-splitting point here, please cite your sources.

+4 Insightful?

Durhhh, did we forget what racism means? Must have been modded by products of the public educational system.

"A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race."

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

This is not what the original post is talking about. He is saying that biology doesn't require any faith. I am saying that it does exactly for the reasons you are pointing out (faith in the scientific method). I am not saying its a religious belief, but its still is "faith".

You obviously have not checked a dictionary lately. Read the only definition that does not involve a religious or sociological component:

2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

THAT is faith -- belief WITHOUT PROOF. I trust my hammer, and I trust the scientific method, because the makers of hammers and the designers (yes, designers) of experiments invite me not only to use their tools, but to examine every mechanism, every fact, that lead to their conclusions. If you really want to split hairs, no, when I perform experiments I do not re-run all every contributing experiment from Newton to present day, but that is not faith; at best, that is trust. It is not faith precisely because the supporting evidence exists, and it open for others to verify (or disprove). Were creationism to open itself to the same scrutiny, it would have a place at the science table. Until it does, it does not belong.

And yes, I am fully aware of the irony of the example sentence on dictionary.com. However, that just emphasizes the role of a scientist. When a scientist makes a hypothesis, ideally, he/she has no faith one way or the other. Since humans are not perfect, I grant you that some harbor a "faith" -- a belief without evidence -- in their own hypotheses. The fundamental difference is that a scientist TESTS that hypothesis, and then presents both the hypothesis and the means for testing it to the world at large. Even people who disagree with the original scientist, who hate the original scientist and everything he/she believes, are invited to the test, or to run their own new tests. If the hypothesis survives enough challenges, then it may become accepted as scientific fact -- until some other data comes along that does not fit, in which case the theory can be modified, refined, or even wholly discarded, and the entire process starts anew.

Until creationism not only brooks, but encourages, such challenges, it will never be science.

dictionary.com is your friend.

You are not "sharing" downloaded music, you are keeping it for yourself as well as distributing it to X number of people. That is called "having your cake and eating it too...and giving that same cake to X number of people". Whoever calls this sharing is grossly misinformed.

If I have a Star Trek replicator and it makes a cake, and I make a copy of that cake and give it to you, I am sharing that cake, yet I have my cake and am eating it, too.

From the dictionary: "4. to use, participate in, enjoy, receive, etc., jointly: The two chemists shared the Nobel prize."

Now, what happens when they DO come up with a Star Trek replicator? You may think it will never happen, but in my dad's lifetime most people thought we'd never land on the moon. Star Trek's self-opening doors were an impossibility, as were the cell phone communicators, flat screen voice activated computers, etc. I can foresee billions upon billions of nanoscopic robots building devices, food, and everything else a molecule at a time.

When that happens, sharing of physical things will be exactly the same as file sharing is now. Will there be an economic upheval? Undoubtedly, as the only thing of value will be real estate.

The internet changed the distribution of music forever. Before recorded music, the only way to make money with music was performance. Things have gone full circle.

40 million copies of the latest Justin Timberlake song did not suddenly appear out of nowhere

Yes they did. Literally out of nowhere.

certainly the people who have permission to sell his song did not receive 40 million payments

And they wouldn't have recieved 40 million payments if it hadn't been shared. In fact, studies show that sales increase because of P2P; they are recieving payments that wouldn't have been made otherwise.

Meaning that song was stolen from them

If it was stolen from them they would no longer have it. You might as well accuse me of stealing your air, or stealing the sunset, or stealing the rain. If you don't want me to hear your music, don't play it. If you are Justin Timberlake I vehemently urge you and beg you not to sing any more!

A chemical reaction is not a nuclear reaction. I think that any company that doesn't understand this difference shouldn't really be in the business of making portable nuclear reactors.

Nuclear definition:
1. Biology Of, relating to, or forming a nucleus: a nuclear membrane.
2. Physics Of or relating to atomic nuclei: a nuclear chain reaction.
3. Using or derived from the energy of atomic nuclei: nuclear power.
4. Of, using, or possessing atomic or hydrogen bombs: nuclear war; nuclear nations.

nuclear. (n.d.). The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/nuclear
Emphasis added.


Knowing a bit about chemistry, I know that protons in the nucleus play very much a role in common chemical reactions, specifically for determining molar amounts of different elements, balanced between proton donor and proton receiver.

Please tell me how this is not nuclear and how your comment could get a +2 informative.

As the poster above said, you conveniently ignored the very first meaning.

I'll comment on the Grammar Nazi bit, though: this has absolutely nothing to do with grammar, so your point is... unclear.
I was merely noting the semantic redundancy.

So why don't you go check what the name means before you call me it. K?

No, no it doesn't.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/cheap
2. costing little labor or trouble: Words are cheap.
4. of little account; of small value; mean; shoddy: cheap conduct; cheap workmanship.

Neither of those 2 definitions mean anything even close to 'inexpensive', and either of them could apply to this situation. Stop and look it up before you go grammar nazi'ing.

Actually, "plagiate" isn't English but rather Italian.

Here's a test. If you invade my property, can I blow your fucking head off with impunity? Yes - and double yes if I live in Texas. Try that with your fucking intangible intellectual so-called property.

I hope that's clear enough for you.

asshat.

No, not all hypocrisy is irony. Irony is when words convey a different meaning contradicting their literal meaning, not when the literal meaning is meant to be conveyed, but merely subverted by actions. The sense of "surprise" (events contradicting expectations) is very weak, and abused in frequently using "irony" to describe it. Which is, I suppose, ironic.

When distributed networks become truly transparent and ubiquitous, we are going to see a future where todays Internet will look absolutely archaic.

Not to rain on your parade, but doesn't the future tend to make most things look archaic? Isn't that kind of...the definition of archaic?

Actually, if you look irony up in a few online dictionaries, you'll find that "unexpected outcome of events" is now an accepted meaning.

It's still a disputed meaning, to be sure, but then I remember hearing "ain't is not a word!" growing up. I never hear that at all anymore. Now it's informal. I imagine most contractions were at one point.

English is not a dead language.

You are completely wrong.

If what you say is true then why is there a whole group of law that concerns copyright infringement? Why not simply use the theft laws already on the books?

Theft is taking a physical object.

Copyright infringement is copying something that you are not allowed to copy. Look I'm not going to debate this because it isn't my opinion. It's fact.

I'm not going to call Louis Farrakhan on this one, but yeah, by the common meaning of race "any people united by common history, language, cultural traits, etc.: the Dutch race.", Germans are a race, and historically the nation was divided along racial lines. While there's a small percentage of generally-non-integrated non-Germans living in Germany, I doubt Joachim Schüth was one of them.

Nobody would say "Japanese" or "Korean" wasn't a racial group. It's really no different.

Insipid means bland. Not annoying, or whatever it was that you were trying to convey by this "...using one of those insipid right click disabling scripts."

The author of this piece seems to be unable to distinguish between fiction and reality. No, we do not have to invent new intentionally sexist/racist generic terms like schoolpenis. However, we do not have to break our existing language just because some words, which are not discriminatory in actual modern usage, can be misunderstood just because of their sound. It would be niggardly to make children refer to their favorite fairy tale hero as snow or coal black or white.

Only for insects and most arthropods. Otherwise it's "antennas" for a conductor that transmits or receives electromagnetic signals. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/antenna

Funny, I had just looked it up not too long before I read your post.

Holy 1984 moment. Did that guy actually say that "Privacy" is defined as governments and businesses safeguarding information from outside sources? And that the word "Privacy" we've all grown up to understand is actually "Anonymity"? That's a move straight out of 1984, redefining words to get inconvenient ideas (freedom, privacy, accountability) out of the citizens consciousness. Here's the definition of "privacy" according to Dictionary.com. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/privacy Notice, it makes no mention of governments or company's. Here's to that definition never changing.

I see this word constantly used when it shouldn't be.
I'm pretty sure what you're looking for was actually
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=sarcasm

The description sounds like only a notch above children's toys today.

I wish someone would define "intelligent" here, because this thing doesn't fit the dictionary definition... oh wait, here it is: "4. Computers. pertaining to the ability to do data processing locally; smart: An intelligent terminal can edit input before transmission to a host computer."

I always heard them referred to "smart" terminals and "dumb" terminals, but whatever. Fram TFA (which differred remarkably from the slashdot summary) this thing can't even take, let alone pass, a turing test. One of these days I'll have to get Artificial Insanity back online; that program was good enough at passing the Turing Test it caused eqiopment failure in a friend's computer once - its attitude pissed him off so much he broke his keyboard. And that program was written in 1983 and originally ran on a 20k 1mz Timex.

Let's see your turing machine do that!

But indeed, this stupid toy is "intelligent" only in the sense that it isn't a dumb terminal. Can't say the same about the slashdot summary.

-mcgrew

PS- the download link is bad; I had Art stored at rusies.us, a site I registered for my ska-loving daughter, bt let it lapse. But the text is still there, an argument against "artificial intelligence". It is as offtopic as the fucking summary...

Really? What body accredited these price drops, and for what where they accredited?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/mutually%20exclusive

"mutually exclusive

adjective
unable to be both true at the same time [syn: contradictory]"

Whoops. Thanks for playing, Dumbo.

It's called schadenfreude. People outside the group like to make themselves feel better by laughing at the misfortunes of people inside the group.

You have repeatedly made the point that use of someones ideas without their permission doesn't deprive them of the use of those ideas. I haven't responded to that exceptyo say that I agree, because thats all I have to say about it. I agree. Yes. That is correct. You are right on that point, which I have never disputed.

I thought you might be sympathetic to the idea that he deserved some credit for having written it.

Why? Why is it impossible for me to support, lets say, trademarks as they are, 10 year copyright terms, and abolition of patents? Or any other of the infinite possibilities in between total abolition of IP and royalties for fire? Can you really not imagine any middle ground?

coffee-nosed

toffee-nosed [taw-fee-nohzd, tof-ee-]
-adjective British Slang.
stuck-up; conceited; pretentious: a toffee-nosed butler; a toffee-nosed shop.
[Origin: 1920-25]
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

toffee-nosed

adjective
snobbish; pretentiously superior

WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.

Grammar Nazis: Yes, I am aware that "ain't" really isn't a word.

Ain't ain't not no word.

It's in the dictionary: ain't.

I don't know what shell you're using, but mine isn't hackneyed at all.

Kind of like how irregardless is not an acceptable word by most major dictionaries?

That is viruses (and not virii either). I don't normally correct spelling if it is just a typo, but you need help.

That is viruses (and not virii either). I don't normally correct spelling if it is just a typo, but you need help.

Typically censorship is done by governments, religious and secular groups, corporations, or the mass media, although other forms of censorship exist.

1. an official who examines books, plays, news reports, motion pictures, radio and television programs, letters, cablegrams, etc., for the purpose of suppressing parts deemed objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds.
2. any person who supervises the manners or morality of others.
3. an adverse critic; faultfinder.
4. (in the ancient Roman republic) either of two officials who kept the register or census of the citizens, awarded public contracts, and supervised manners and morals.
5. (in early Freudian dream theory) the force that represses ideas, impulses, and feelings, and prevents them from entering consciousness in their original, undisguised forms.
-verb (used with object) 6. to examine and act upon as a censor.
7. to delete (a word or passage of text) in one's capacity as a censor.

I think you probably mean a clique mentality. A cliché mentality would be one that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I think you probably mean a clique mentality. A cliché mentality would be one that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

I'd love to see a hardware firewall. It would need an entire TCP/IP stack implemented in discrete logic, or maybe Verilog on FPGAs if we're not feeling completely evil. Talk about huge and impossible to debug.

Hell, create a searing flame capable of burning anyone to death who dare walks through it- that's the literal definition of a firewall. The heat caused by the burning of wood or something else is a "hardware" firewall.

Last I heard, a firewall was a wall built to withstand fire for a significantly longer period of time than normal. For example, the firewall in your car would keep an engine fire from coming through and immolating (or at least broiling) the contents of the passenger compartment before said contents could get out.

quote:

"Hell, create a searing flame capable of burning anyone to death who dare walks through it- that's the literal definition of a firewall."

actually, the literal definition of a firewall is a partition that stops the spread of fire. for example, you have one in your car.

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