Slashdot Mirror

Sate is spelled correctly. I did however misspell the word separate. Or are "your" just trying to be ironic?

Unfortunately, you never learned that "alot" is not a word, or not aword if you prefer. Strangely, we live in an era of instant information access.

I guess you don't know what the word 'could' means.

Here ya go:

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

Global warming has finally been explained: the Earth is getting hotter because the Sun is burning more brightly than at any time during the past 1,000 years, according to new research.

Climatologists have addressed this before:

At the same time, estimates of solar output in the past are extremely uncertain, and so there is a great deal of scope in blaming any unexplained phenomena on solar changes without fear of contradiction.

It is us monkeys, who have been actively measuring temperatures for two hundred years at best and are reconstructing climate history with very limited devices and methology that are getting overtly excited when we still have no idea whatsoever as what is "normal" on this planet in this part of the galaxy.

The other thing to take home is that there are a lot of people on this planet all too happy to abuse doomsday predictions to further their agendas both socially and economically.

FTA:

Microsoft views open source through the lens of "coopetition from commercial and open-source strategies at the same time," Hilf said.

This sort of blatant disregard for the English language is simply intolerable.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=coopetiti on

OK, you correctly point out the fact that tactics matter more than strategy when we live and die by the quarterly report.

That would almost be as dramatic as you were hoping, if only "tactics" and "strategy" weren't synonyms.

Seriously though, I don't see why you're trying to make this about open and closed source software. Mozilla basically said to Microsoft: "Here, do what you want with our market share while we go do something else for a while." If Redhat stopped all development on their OS for a few years so they could work on a killer office suite, SuSe and other distros would be all over Redhat's market share. Or, more precisely, Redhat users would be all over SuSe and other distros.

Now that the strategic investments in good infrastructure pay dividends, is it really necessary to force-feed any closed, OS-centric solution on anyone?

Netscape used to have more than half of the market share. Right now, Firefox has less than ten percent. XULRunner has yet to break even, much less pay dividends.

Perhaps you would like to learn a new word!

PS Politicization isn't a word

In USA it is
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=politiciz ation

In England it isn't
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/results.asp?search word=politicization

subconscious
adj.
        Not wholly conscious; partially or imperfectly conscious: subconscious perceptions.

n.
        The part of the mind below the level of conscious perception. Often used with the.

1.
1. A distant view or prospect , especially one seen through an opening, as between rows of buildings or trees.
2. An avenue or other passage affording such a view.
2. An awareness of a range of time, events, or subjects; a broad mental view: "the deep and sweeping vistas these pioneering critics opened up" (Arthur C. Danto).

As a free bonus, may I present the fabulous Vista Cruiser!

I prefer sailing without wind. ;^)

(I chose this nick because Spoon was taken in a game I was signing up for way, way back when, and at the time I had no idea it was actually used as a word or acronym. I kept it because it's unique.)

Though that is a common mistake.

"Last I checked, a "game" wasn't required to have an ending or have you earning points."
Check again:
Game

A puzzle has a goal you achieve.

A sim where there is no goal, is a toy.

There is nothing wrong with either of them.

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

imply tr.v. implied, implying, implies

1. To involve by logical necessity; entail: Life implies growth and death.

2. To express or indicate indirectly: His tone implied disapproval. See Synonyms at suggest. See Usage Note at infer.

Just because the definition does not use the word does not mean that the connotation of the word does not include it.

Depends on who you ask:

http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=comparison

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=compariso n

American Heritage and a couple of others include similarities *and* differences.

Comparison deals with similar traits.

Dictionary.com's definitions

Note the second definition:

To examine in order to note the similarities or differences of.

Note the usage notes, which state that the preposition "to" is generally indicates that compare is being used to highlight differences between the two (or more) things, while "with" is usually used to indicate similar traits. Note that the origional post stated:

How about the idiots who, for example, think Bush is comparable to Hitler?

Also, recall that a rather famous playwright and poet once asked,

Shall I compare thee to a summer's day?

Clearly, the intent is to compare a human being with a temporal event, things that don't share precisely similar traits.

PETA is by definition a terrorist group.

Support of "extremists and terrorists"
Dictionairy.com definition of terrorism.

I'm assuming they mean canopic jars. Coptic is a term for orthodox Egyptian Christians, derived from Aegyptos (Greek for Egyptian). Copticism was considered a heresy for a long time, but *LOTS* of the early Copts were *VERY* influential in what became the Catholic church. Also, for some reason, a lot of Egyptian politicians are/were Copts too. See http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Coptic_Christ ianity or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coptic_Christianity.

Argh!
What the fuck does leveraged mean!?
I was under the impression that it involves a lever and a pivot point.
Yes, I know it's a buzzword, but this one is getting fucking ridicilous!
Dictionary.com has nothing to correlate leverage and utility. Link.
Next time advertisers and marketers decide to play buzzword bingo I hope they pick "Selma Hayek" as the buzzword of the month.

Most of the exploits that leveraged IE vulnerabilities to plant spyware were based on ActiveX and JavaScript, said Gribb.
parent: http://news.yahoo.com/s/cmp/20060210/tc_cmp/179102 616

World Wind leverages satellite imagery and elevation data to allow users to experience Earth terrain in visually rich 3D, just as if they were really there.
http://www.worldwindcentral.com/wiki/World_Wind

learn how other organizations leverage the pod
https://forums.omnipod.com/

And of course, to stay on topic, I'll save us all the trouble:
Firefox Users Surf Safer
No shit Sherlock?
or
It took two professors and two grad assistents to come to this conclusion? Money well spent Washington, money well spent.

Frankly, I speak English, and this half-arsed corporatisation of American colloquia needs to stop. It's not attractive, and it makes British ears very unhappy.

Not for nothing, but this verbization* of words by damn British colloquia hurts my sensitive American ears.

It's not bigotry.

Yes, it is. To be a homophobe is to be strongly partial to one's own group and intolerant (i.e. opposed to the inclusion or participation) of those who differ.

The civil rights movement pushed for equality not for people having to state that this group of people is fine and I fully support their lifestyle choices.

First, the civil rights movement pushed not only for legal but social equality; that is indeed saying that "this group of people is fine", as in "it's ok if my sister marries one".

Second, sexual orientation is not a "lifestyle choice"; gays no more choose to be attracted to men than I chose to get hot about women.

(Maybe you had to make such a choice? You're coming off as homophobic here, and it's been found that homophobia often correllates with sexual uncertainty and repressed homosexuality. Are you getting all bent out of shape about people doing something that you'd like to do yourself but feel that you can't?)

Indeed, if sexual orientation were a choice, rationally we'd all have to choose to be bisexual and maximize our chances of a date. Simple economics tells us that we'd adjust demand to meet supply.

There is no single "gay lifestyle" any more than there is a single "straight lifestyle". Some gays make lifestyle choices I think are stupid or harmful. Some straight people make lifestyle choices I think are stupid or harmful. (Though bigoted legal and social structures sometimes play a role in pushed gays towards unwise choices; if you have to hide your sexuality for fear of discrimination or even an assualt, that can pressure you toward certain choices.)

They aren't working to remove rights from people they are just saying these are the people who we will associate with and not others.

The BSA is saying "we won't associate with these other people because we think they're morally inferior". Do they have a legal right to do this? Yes. (So long as they are a private organization; the degree of public support they receive calls this into question.) That doesn't make them any less bigoted.

(BTW, to be clear I mean the BSA as an organization. Individual people within in may or may not agree with the official position of the BSA leadership.)

Gift is a f*cking NOUN

It is also a verb: go read this. Of course you won't do that, so here is an excerpt:

gift Audio pronunciation of "gift" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (gft) n.

1. Something that is bestowed voluntarily and without compensation.
2. The act, right, or power of giving.
3. A talent, endowment, aptitude, or inclination.

tr.v. gifted, gifting, gifts

1. To present something as a gift to.
2. To endow with.

1. To present something as a gift to.
2. To endow with.

Homophobe would be someone who is actively scared of homosexuals. Not simply someone who doesn't approve.

No. Phobia doesn't just mean fear.

And to say someone "simply doesn't approve" of homosexuals is no more sensible than saying somone "simply doesn't approve" of black people or Jews or any other group.

A push for tolerance should not be overrun by a push for acceptance.

I can picture you in the 1960s: "Black people's push for tolerance should not be overrun by a push for acceptance; it's enough that I let them live in my neighborhood, I shouldn't be socially pressured to let my sister date one."

Sorry, no. Bigotry sucks, and we're now in a time when homophobes are going to be called on it the way racists were decades ago.

Homophobe would be someone who is actively scared of homosexuals. Not simply someone who doesn't approve.

No. Phobia doesn't just mean fear.

And to say someone "simply doesn't approve" of homosexuals is no more sensible than saying somone "simply doesn't approve" of black people or Jews or any other group.

A push for tolerance should not be overrun by a push for acceptance.

I can picture you in the 1960s: "Black people's push for tolerance should not be overrun by a push for acceptance; it's enough that I let them live in my neighborhood, I shouldn't be socially pressured to let my sister date one."

Sorry, no. Bigotry sucks, and we're now in a time when homophobes are going to be called on it the way racists were decades ago.

Is too! http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=anthropom orphization
The spelling is duly noted, though.

From: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=fact

fact
n.

      1. Knowledge or information based on real occurrences: an account based on fact; a blur of fact and fancy.
      2.
                  1. Something demonstrated to exist or known to have existed: Genetic engineering is now a fact. That Chaucer was a real person is an undisputed fact.
                  2. A real occurrence; an event: had to prove the facts of the case.
                  3. Something believed to be true or real: a document laced with mistaken facts.
      3. A thing that has been done, especially a crime: an accessory before the fact.
      4. Law. The aspect of a case at law comprising events determined by evidence: The jury made a finding of fact.

"impassionate" means almost the exact opposite of what you mean, in general. It means to make someone impassioned (it's a verb, not an abjective). Actually, there is one definition close to what you meant there, but it's pretty rare, I think. In fact, impassionate only appears in unabridged dictionaries. impassioned is a much more common word, and does mean the opposite of what you meant.

"impassionate" means almost the exact opposite of what you mean, in general. It means to make someone impassioned (it's a verb, not an abjective). Actually, there is one definition close to what you meant there, but it's pretty rare, I think. In fact, impassionate only appears in unabridged dictionaries. impassioned is a much more common word, and does mean the opposite of what you meant.

humor

How is not being able to do something an "upshot" of owning hardware?

less is more?

Perhaps this will help. Note the distinct lack of value judgements in the definition.

I don't see any presupposition of regulation here. Regulation is anti-capitalism (and anti-freedom), pure and simple. Also, freedom of contract is meaningless if you are dependent on a specific organization to validate it. A contract is a voluntary agreement between two or more parties. Why should these parties be forced to depend on the government to enforce it? Why shouldn't they be able to choose another mediation agency if they wanted?

Adam Smith may not have had a problem with that, but that doesn't mean that it is fair or moral.

Ahem.

"Colorless green ideas sleep furiously."

In mathematics. there is 'no such number.' I'm saying there is in reality, and that mathematics has too narrow a scope to acknowledge such a numbers existance.

No. Numbers exist and are defined only through mathematics. You haven't found a number that exists in reality but not in mathematics. What you are saying is literally meaningless and therefore not in need of explanation.

I'm saying that reality can accept a value that mathematics can't such as an inifninte number of zeros with a trailing one.

Really, then would you enlighten us and tell us what that value would be? Perhaps you could write it down for us? You're talking about standing on an infinite plane and looking for the edge. (hint: there is none) It's called sophistry.

At 0, or any low rpm, the electric motors in a hybrid will easily have enough torque that tire traction will be the limiting factor on acceleration (even if you put big sticky race car tires on).

I doubt it. I dunno the torque specs but last I looked the electric motors in a hybrid only provided ~40-50 hp peak. I sincerely doubt they have enough torque to trivially spin the tires.

my car has only 155bhp and 155ft-lb stock

Yet you did it, and proudly recounted the experience here.

I do not think that word means what you think it means. Specifically: "To narrate the facts or particulars of." I did not provide a narration (look that word up too, if you're confused.) I only made a mention. Hope this helps. Try not to use words you don't understand in the future.

You pulled out your wallet, and bought a big inneficient engine, and you pull it out and pay too much for gas.

Riiight. My 2.4 liter SOHC Nissan engine with SEFI is a "big inneficient engine"(sic). The 1989 240SX - the vehicle in question - gets 30 mpg at 85mph, stock. Mine gets a little less since I've mucked with it, but even so I got 25mpg on my last tank, and that's mixed driving including twisty, hilly roads. That's real, measured mileage. It's better than half as good as a latest-model Prius, and the car is a 1989. It costs more energy to make the Prius than I could save by buying one, even if I kept the Prius for 30 years.

My other car is a 1981 Mercedes 300SD. It, too, has a fairly small engine; a 3 liter 5 cylinder SOHC turbo diesel. It also gets 25mpg real-world, in spite of weighing 3500 pounds, and that car has an automatic transmission based on a 1930s chrysler design. But even better, that vehicle (my primary - I'm driving the Nissan right now because my mercedes alternator went out, I think) can be run on vegetable oil or biodiesel, while the prius and other gasoline hybrids run only on gasoline. They could possibly be redesigned as "flex-fuel" vehicles that can run on either gasoline or E85 (15% gasoline, 85% ethanol) but ethanol is pretty useless, being even more expensive to make than biodiesel, and far less available than SVO, WVO, or diesel.

Granted, I do pay too much for gas, but I'm on my way to running on veg. Not in the sports car, but that's not meant to be my commuter anyway. The Benz is a lot more comfortable.

Again you have reading comprehension problems

pulverized into dust, inhaled/ingested - chemical effects (Which are WELL established), radiological effects IF inhaled/ingested

Alpha radiation is relatively harmless - but is dangerous if exposed internally (like through inhaling an alpha emitter), and uranium is also CHEMICALLY dangerous

READ MORE CAREFULLY

"All isotopes and compounds of uranium are toxic, teratogenic, and radioactive" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium#Precautions

We cannot ignore that the word "theory" is widely misunderstood outside the scientific community, where it means something closer to "wild guess" or "stab in the dark" than a rigourous, well-tested hypothesis that is almost certainly correct, or close to correct.

It's not that it's widely misunderstood. It's that both are, in fact, valid definitions of the word "theory" (check out definitions 1 and 6). Same word, different contexts, different meanings -- welcome to the English language. Please see the "free as in beer"/"free as in freedom" issue. I think what is widely misunderstood is that any group, context, or profession can have a monopoly on the meaning of a single word. Language is a very transient, imprecise thing. Unless we understand which definition we mean, we'll all just keep talking past each other.

I'm glad you pointed this out. Not all scientists are also linguists. I see many get fixated on the scientific use of the word theory to the exclusion of all other valid definitions and contexts. Unfortunately, the English language has many instances of words that have been assigned multiple meanings (pay special attention to meanings 1 and 6). This is similar to the "free as in beer" or "free as in freedom" business. Maybe whenever "theory" is used, we should clarify: Theory as in science, or theory as in common parlance?

Given that theories have to be testable and repeatable, is the Big Bang really a scientific theory?

• In general usage, what is called a theory is actually an hypothesis. In science, a theory has a very specific meaning. Using the dictionary.com definition science uses definition one. General usage encompasses definitions 2 through 6 , with emphasis on 4, 5, and 6.
  
• In order for an hypothesis to be scientific, it must be testable.
  
• One tests an hypothesis using experiments that are repeatable. If they are not repeatable there is a problem with either the experiment, the hypothesis, or the data.
  

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

Sounds like fraud to me.

I bet they got it confused with hoard.

You also have to admit that the name "The Gimp" is somewhat risque as well, considering most people know what a gimp actually is.

What is risque about what a gimp "really" is? Perhaps you are referring to the man referred to as a gimp in Pulp Fiction?

A Gimp is actually a person with a limp.... http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=gimp

http://www.wordreference.com/definition/leverage

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

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Diction ary&va=leverage

Forgot a link...

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

Notice #2 - New information of any kind: The requirement was news to him. News DOES imply NEW, not OLD. Also #1a - Information about recent events or happenings, especially as reported by newspapers, periodicals, radio, or television.

For them, tabbed browsing and a search bar are new and innovative.

I disagree. It might be new, but it is not innovative.

yes

Short term memory? I'll give you three phrases to jog you memory.

I think you might be the one in need of assistance.

How is executive mismanagement different from a broken business model? Is that a trick question?

Just in case you're not trolling, I'll bite. Mismanagement is running an industry (print media) that regularly sees 20-30% profit margins (on par with drug companies), and claiming, at the same time, that money is too tight to pay carriers mileage that covers gas prices, or to employ a staff anywhere near the size it would take to produce a first rate product.

That's the difference.

White man says white man in strange place = "adventurous explorer"

Adventurous: inclined to undertake new and daring enterprises
think venture capital, historicaly we know that europeans traveled to the new world looking for money/gold and land.
We know that they took slaves and killed lots of people.

Adventurer: One that seeks adventure, One that attempts to gain wealth and social position by unscrupulous means.

White man says black man in strange place = "slave"
We know that these Adventurers took slaves from Africa to the new world.

When we find African bodies in the new world we can be pretty sure that they were taken there by Europeans as either slaves or as indentured servants.
Indentured servants are not slaves, in that they can buy out their "contract", but I've no information about how long they had to work to do so, and what amount of freedom they had while they paid this off.

In short whats your point?