Slashdot Mirror

/sarcasm I propose we use a different word for female say "fale". Oh wait, that doesn't have a good connotation. =P

What happens when searching for drinking buddies aka "ale" ? Will it match male AND female?

If they are doing substring matching then the algorithm is an epic fail.
i.e.
In the early days of UO you couldn't type "assassin" because the profanity filter would find "ass". God help you if you wanted to use "compassion". LOL. There are a ton of valid words with ass in them.

This isn't rocket science -- just basic computer science.

Another interesting scenario: Say someone takes a lein against their UBI (they use it as collateral for a loan). They take that money and blow it all on a big party. Now what do you do?

Do you make it illegal to use UBI as collateral?

Do they declare bankruptcy?

Do they starve?

FYI, obsolete computer stuff is marked as "deprecated" - note that there's no 'i' - when its use is no longer supported. It is financial assets which "depreciate".

FYI, obsolete computer stuff is marked as "deprecated" - note that there's no 'i' - when its use is no longer supported. It is financial assets which "depreciate".

You need to talk to is either a forensic accountant (those who liquidate companies and thus have typically spent equal parts of their degree studying financial law) or better still straight up lawyers specialising in finance.

Why should we need to do this for something as basic as whether a debt has occured?

https://legal-dictionary.thefr...

DEBT, contracts. A sum of money due by certain and express agreement. 3 Bl. Com. 154. In a less technical sense, as in the "act to regulate arbitrations and proceedings in courts of justice" of Pennsylvania, passed the 21st of March, 1806, s. 5, it means an claim for money. In a still more enlarged sense, it denotes any kind of a just demand; as, the debts of a bankrupt. 4 S. & R. 506.
          2. Debts arise or are proved by matter of record, as judgment debts; by bonds or specialties; and by simple contracts, where the quantity is fixed and specific, and does not depend upon any future valuation to settle it. 3 Bl. Com. 154; 2 Hill. R. 220.
          3. According to the civilians, debts are divided into active and passive. By the former is meant what is due to us, by the latter, what we owe. By liquid debt, they understand one, the payment of which may be immediately enforced, and not one which is due at a future time, or is subject to a condition; by hypothecary debt is meant, one which is a lien over an estate and a doubtful debt, is one the payment of which is uncertain. Clef des Lois Rom. h.t.
          4. Debts are discharged in various ways, but principally by payment. See Accord and Satisfaction; Bankruptcy; Confusion Compensation; Delegation; Defeasance; Discharge of a contract; Extinction; Extinguishment; Former recovery; Lapse of time; Novation; Payment; Release; Rescission; Set off.
          5. In payment of debts, some are to be paid before others, in cases of insolvent estates first, in consequence of the character of the creditor, as debts due to the United States are generally to be first paid; and secondly, in consequence of the nature of the debt, as funeral expenses and servants' wages, which are generally paid in preference to other debts. See Preference; Privilege; Priority.

Nothing in this says that eating at a restaurant where you eat before paying doesn't constitute incurring a debt. If you fail to pay, the restaurant can sue you for the cost of the meal. How could they do this if it isn't a debt?

No, not debt. Look up the *legal* definition of debt from a financial law reference. Not the dictionary definition. You have no incurred debt.

Looked it up, my definition works. You want to provide a citation that says otherwise?
Debt:
A sum of money that is owed or due to be paid because of an express agreement; a specified sum of money that one person is obligated to pay and that another has the legal right to collect or receive. A fixed and certain obligation to pay money or some other valuable thing or things, either in the present or in the future. In a still more general sense, that which is due from one person to another, whether money, goods, or services. In a broad sense, any duty to respond to another in money, labor, or service; it may even mean a moral or honorary obligation, unenforceable by legal action. Also, sometimes an aggregate of separate debts, or the total sum of the existing claims against a person or company. Thus we speak of the "national debt," the "bonded debt" of a corporation, and so on.

Ordering off the menu, which comes with prices and terms, constitutes the express agreement.

Owing money for a service is not being in debt

Wrong.

Debt:

A sum of money that is owed or due to be paid because of an express agreement; a specified sum of money that one person is obligated to pay and that another has the legal right to collect or receive.

A fixed and certain obligation to pay money or some other valuable thing or things, either in the present or in the future. In a still more general sense, that which is due from one person to another, whether money, goods, or services.

In a broad sense, any duty to respond to another in money, labor, or service; it may even mean a moral or honorary obligation, unenforceable by legal action. Also, sometimes an aggregate of separate debts, or the total sum of the existing claims against a person or company. Thus we speak of the "national debt," the "bonded debt" of a corporation, and so on.

https://legal-dictionary.thefr...

Well, Merriam-Webster has an entry for moonquake. Oxford lists marsquake. The Free Dictionary has sunquake. Dictionary.com lists starquake.

While the 14th century usage may have meant something else, it's certainly well known that the entire planet Earth does in fact quake during an earthquake. Why do you think remote sensors can detect earthquakes half way around the planet? Definitions of words change over a couple of years, let alone several centuries. In this case, I'd say the term "earthquake" as in the planet is more accurate than the original definition. But it becomes problematic when you're talking about a quake on another celestial body.

I also believe the "earth", as in dirt, that was referred to in the 14th century was generally referring to cultivable topsoil. You're not going to find much of that on the moon, mars, or a star.

Skyjacking is a specific term that came into use in the 1960s to describe the rash of airplane hijackings that occurred in the late 60s and 70s. I count 20 skyjackings that involved the United States in just the decade of 1970. It is a specific type of hijacking that involves airplanes, and which typically takes place while the plane is in the sky during flight. Thus the plane is redirected to some other destination because the risk of the threat being real must be taken seriously.

I presume you are in your 20s to have not encountered this word, which is defined in pretty much every English dictionary there is. If you prefer "A hijacking that occurs on an airplane while the plane is in flight" over "skyjacking" then feel free to use the longer phrase in your writings and conversation. However your lack of exposure to this word hardly makes it "tabloid-headline made-up".

To totally beat this point to death, here are some various dictionary entries.
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
https://dictionary.cambridge.o...
https://en.oxforddictionaries....
https://www.dictionary.com/bro...
https://www.thefreedictionary....
https://www.macmillandictionar...

I also note that the Chome spellchecker knows this word by default as well.

I don't believe there is any such right.

Of course there is... it's literally called a Landowner's Right to Quiet Enjoyment, and
interfering with that results in a legal tort for which one can be sued called Private Nuisance

A private nuisance is an interference with a person's enjoyment and use of his land. The law recognizes that landowners, or those in rightful possession of land, have the right to the unimpaired condition of the property and to reasonable comfort and convenience in its occupation.

Examples of private nuisances abound. Nuisances that interfere with the physical condition of the land include vibration or blasting that damages a house; destruction of crops; raising of a water table; or the pollution of soil, a stream, or an underground water supply. Examples of nuisances interfering with the comfort, convenience, or health of an occupant are foul odors, noxious gases, smoke, dust, loud noises, excessive light, or high temperatures. Moreover, a nuisance may also disturb an occupant's mental tranquility, such as a neighbor who keeps a vicious dog, even though an injury is only threatened and has not actually occurred.

An attractive nuisance is a danger likely to lure children onto a person's land. For example, an individual who has a pool on his property has a legal obligation to take reasonable precautions, such as erecting a fence, to prevent foreseeable injury to children.

Trespass is sometimes confused with nuisance, but the two are distinct. A trespass action protects against an invasion of one's right to exclusive possession of land. If a landowner drops a tree across her neighbor's boundary line she has committed a trespass; if her dog barks all night keeping the neighbor awake, she may be liable for nuisance.

Legal Responsibility
A private nuisance is a tort, that is, a civil wrong. To determine accountability for an alleged nuisance, a court will examine three factors: the defendant's fault, whether there has been a substantial interference with the plaintiff's interest, and the reasonableness of the defendant's conduct.

What boat is that, blase to the point of willful ignorance?

This one. I can understand how you might never have heard of the expression though, since it's only been in common use for 150 years or so.

Which means it is just as likely to go nuts become dysfunctional as a bellow average intelligence person. The 'smarter' the AI the more likely it is to go nuts and not dysfunctional nuts, a little in error but totally nuts ie shut down, catatonic, irreconcilable loop nuts.

AI only needs to be smart enough to carry out minor acts ie a bug hunter AI controlling a little army of limited bug hunter capability, probably modelled on something like a chameleon. Camouflage, sticky tongue and holding tank, smart enough to endlessly wander around a farm, catching bugs and in that design incapable of harming anything except bugs.

No GOD pshaw https://www.thefreedictionary...., the totality of existence is my God and hence as I feel I direct tiny little elemental parts of the totality of existence and of course I am not alone in that but share existence with a virtual infinity of living beings, GOD therefore does direct not only the normal universe but the quantum universe and the multi verse via elements of God itself, via us as a teeny tiny part of God (lets not suffer from delusions of grandeur), not just us but every living thing in the normal universe, the quantum verse and the multi-verse

PS mathematically speaking the multi-verse does not contain slightly different universes, that goes against infinity logic (fractional infinity, where fraction of infinity are both finite and infinite, relatively speaking), otherwise it would contain an infinite number of identical universes. So actually infinite universes, infinitely far apart and infinitely different, relative to our normal universe, is more mathematically accurate.

God is the totality of existence and not some goat herder wish machine and some really poorly written, would should be illegal books (illegal because they contain hate speech).

Yes, I read "IRA" as meaning either "Individual Retirement Account" or "Irish Republican Army". https://acronyms.thefreedictio...

Industry loves an unending flow of people too inexperienced to know that they are being taken advantage of.

Yes and the great iriony is you espouse the very ideology that allows it to happen, workers rational interests are not in line with capitalists, you americans really love capitalism as a religion and thats why you are so abused. You guys have stockholme syndrome.

https://medical-dictionary.the...

almost all stories & news is BAD

This is the crux of the argument. Reminds me of the 400 year old saying no news is good news.

Pretty hard to refute when four centuries of people have believed it.

Let me tell you from personal experience there's nothing like being in an open carry state, having a minor disagreement with some one and having them draw attention to the fact that they are carrying a gun in that context.

Perhaps I don't understand, but even outside of a gun-free zone, isn't that assault? And if it wasn't assault, then how intimidated were you, really?

Seriously, I thought the entire intent assault-prohibition laws is to cover exactly the kind of problem that you're talking about. Perhaps we just don't enforce that law anymore?

A dictatorship of the proletariat.

Led, of course, by people who've appointed themselves the vanguard of the proletariat.

Funny how that always works.

Ah yes, I meant that Peter Harzheim is not a member of the DLRG like in the post before that. Small typo forgetting that one 'not', sorry. No reason for name calling.

Bottom line: So far the only link that can be made between the DLRG and that statement is through that article from The Guardian. It is a bit of a stretch to say that the DLRG links (the growing number of) child drownings in Germany to obsession with cellphones under those circumstances.
You know what an appropriate expression for these methods is? -- Putting a spin on it.
https://idioms.thefreedictiona...
https://www.dictionary.com/bro...
https://www.dict.cc/englisch-d...

And why should we listen to somebody too stupid to tell the difference between impeachable and impeccable? Never mind science; they ought to go back to their grammar school!

And why should we listen to somebody too stupid to tell the difference between impeachable and impeccable? Never mind science; they ought to go back to their grammar school!

It's ok, I don't mind you looking like an idiot.

https://www.collinsdictionary....
https://en.oxforddictionaries....
https://www.dictionary.com/bro...
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki...
https://dictionary.cambridge.o...
https://www.thefreedictionary....

Me, I speak English.

I think that Washington's attorney general is confusing the right to publish with being responsible for what you publish. It is extremely hard to restrain speech in the U.S. prior to publication.

The Pentagon Papers were relevant to national security and there could not be prior restraint on publishing those. https://legal-dictionary.thefr...

Some state attorney generals willies about someone 3D printing a gun isn't even close to a national security issue. Stopping the information from being posted until a final adjudication should be nigh-on impossible.

A guilty plea is the same as a conviction. Look it up for yourself.

Wrongo. The defendant makes their plea during the arraignment in the beginning of the trial.

I've looked it up for you because you're too incompetent to do it yourself:

A criminal proceeding at which the defendant is officially called before a court of competent jurisdiction, informed of the offense charged in the complaint, information, indictment, or other charging document, and asked to enter a plea of guilty, not guilty, or as otherwise permitted by law.

Conviction happens at the end of the trial:

The outcome of a criminal prosecution which concludes in a judgment that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged.

After 2 years of investigating

The Mueller investigation started in the last week of May, 2017. Are you rounding 14 months up to "2 years"?

No, I'm rounding up if anything. The investigation into Russia collusion started as early as late Spring 2016, so it's been going on for over 2 years, and the FBI officially announced the DNC hack investigation 2 years ago today. Again, some simple research goes a long way.

Also, if one of your remaining teeth should fall out, put it under your pillow and Jared Kushner will put a MAGA hat there for you.

Awww, neat! I didn't know that. I'll have to try that sometime! Great contribution to the discussion!

A guilty plea is the same as a conviction. Look it up for yourself.

Wrongo. The defendant makes their plea during the arraignment in the beginning of the trial.

I've looked it up for you because you're too incompetent to do it yourself:

A criminal proceeding at which the defendant is officially called before a court of competent jurisdiction, informed of the offense charged in the complaint, information, indictment, or other charging document, and asked to enter a plea of guilty, not guilty, or as otherwise permitted by law.

Conviction happens at the end of the trial:

The outcome of a criminal prosecution which concludes in a judgment that the defendant is guilty of the crime charged.

After 2 years of investigating

The Mueller investigation started in the last week of May, 2017. Are you rounding 14 months up to "2 years"?

No, I'm rounding up if anything. The investigation into Russia collusion started as early as late Spring 2016, so it's been going on for over 2 years, and the FBI officially announced the DNC hack investigation 2 years ago today. Again, some simple research goes a long way.

Also, if one of your remaining teeth should fall out, put it under your pillow and Jared Kushner will put a MAGA hat there for you.

Awww, neat! I didn't know that. I'll have to try that sometime! Great contribution to the discussion!

It took me awhile to "figure" out what figural memory is. I finally found a reference referring to "figural memory (the ability to recall shapes)".

Given that, I think the emoji generation is training their figural memory just fine.

The fact that the dictionary itself can’t even define the non-dairy definition of “milk” without referring to actual milk should tell you something about what the word inherently means. Here’s DuckDuckGo’s suggested definition:

A liquid, such as coconut milk, milkweed sap, plant latex, or various medical emulsions, that is similar to milk in appearance.

But you see the same thing happening in other dictionaries as well, nearly all of which define “milk” in terms of its resemblance to actual milk:
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
https://www.thefreedictionary....
https://medical-dictionary.the...

The fact that the dictionary itself can’t even define the non-dairy definition of “milk” without referring to actual milk should tell you something about what the word inherently means. Here’s DuckDuckGo’s suggested definition:

A liquid, such as coconut milk, milkweed sap, plant latex, or various medical emulsions, that is similar to milk in appearance.

But you see the same thing happening in other dictionaries as well, nearly all of which define “milk” in terms of its resemblance to actual milk:
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
https://www.thefreedictionary....
https://medical-dictionary.the...

what is SOT? I even tried to look it up. Yep I think I fail. Or someone did.

By giving up our secrets like that, he DID levy war on America.

Next you will say that he did not levy war, BECAUSE:
The assembling of a body of men for the purpose of effecting by force a treasonable object; and all who perform any part however minute, or however remote from the scene of action, and who are leagued in the general conspiracy, are considered as engaged in levying war, within the meaning of the constitution.
BUT, Wikileaks is ran by an Australian and others, combined with Russia, who DO want to see America's downfall.That is war. Putin, like CHinese leaders, is in a cold war with the west, but esp. America. Turning over secrets to these nations IS treason.

More importantly, you need to define how you will determine what constitutes "harm" for future cases. Otherwise some future government could use these same taxes to punish Richard Stallman for "harming" society based on their own standards.

The problem I see with trying to define data collected from Facebook and Google users as "harm" is that the data was given up willingly. For a contract to be valid, there has to be consideration - both parties have to give up something of value to the other. In the case of big data, the user gave up their data in exchange for some service. Likewise, the company gave up that service in exchange for the data. Both sides gave and received consideration, making it a valid contract. (This is why you often hear that economics is not a zero-sum game. You can make a zero-sum exchange of goods and services, which are a net benefit to both parties. e.g. I have two water bottles, you have two hamburgers. If we are both hungry and thirsty, trading one water bottle for one hamburger results in a net benefit to both of us, even though the amount of physical goods between the two of us remains the same.)

While giving up something of value could in absolute terms be considered "harm", the fact that it was given up in exchange for something received, and the fact that the person made the exchange willingly constitutes evidence that in their own opinion the exchange was a net benefit to themselves, not harm. And the justification for any tax meant to counteract the harm goes out the window.

Contrast this to surveillance and data collection done without the user's knowledge or consent. In that case, the user is unwittingly giving up the data. And if they knew the data were being collected or disseminated they might decide the exchange was not a benefit to themselves, and decide not to make the deal. In that case, you can argue that harm is being done to the users. Such is the case for companies losing data to hackers due to their lax security.

In some cases, removed pay phones have been restored by request: Pay phone at ranger station near Big Four Ice Caves is reinstalled.

And who remembers terms like COCOT?

Crypto currencies are fantastic investments, with their value pegged to the price of Dutch Tulip Bulbs...

According to these idiots insults are hate speech:
http://www.dictionary.com/brow...
noun
speech that attacks, threatens, or insults a person or group on the basis of national origin, ethnicity, color, religion, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, or disability.

Websters seems to have it simplified down to a literal state which could be fine:
https://www.merriam-webster.co...
Definition of Hate speech
: speech expressing hatred of a particular group of people

Wikipedia is all over the map but at least seems to only report on various countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

These people are subjectively confused thinking "any form of expression regarded as offensive":
https://definitions.uslegal.co...
Hate Speech Law and Legal Definition
Hate speech is a communication that carries no meaning other than the expression of hatred for some group, especially in circumstances in which the communication is likely to provoke violence. It is an incitement to hatred primarily against a group of persons defined in terms of race, ethnicity, national origin, gender, religion, sexual orientation, and the like. Hate speech can be any form of expression regarded as offensive to racial, ethnic and religious groups and other discrete minorities or to women.

These people get it:
https://www.urbandictionary.co...
  Hate speech
A highfalutin' way of saying "I disagree with your meticulously-researched, irrefutable facts, so I am going to organize a social media campaign to demonize you and ruin your life. But don't forget to donate to my Patreon."
Sane, rational human being: "I sure do loves me some grapes!"
Filthy SJW bacterium: "OMFG GRAPE HAS 'RAPE' IN IT THAT'S HATE SPEECH! RAAAAAAAPE CULTUUUUUURE!"

Disparaging a social group is hate speech to these people:
https://www.thefreedictionary....
hate speech
n.
Bigoted speech attacking or disparaging a social group or a member of such a group.

Wrong. The rational approach is to check a dictionary. Or several.

1. https://www.thefreedictionary....
2. https://www.merriam-webster.co...
3. https://www.collinsdictionary....

You might actually (gasp) understand what the other person is saying. Crazy talk, I know.

All harassment is, by definition, repetitive.

Go.

Read.

The.

Dictionary.

All correct definitions of the word require the behavior to be repetitive.

In other news, Zero__Kelvin is right and all the dictionary makers are wrong.

It is literally the definition of the word.

According to you, not apparently enoug oter people to influence dictionaries.

Let's take Mirriam-Webster (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/harass):

b (1) : to annoy persistently

        was harassing his younger brother

(2) : to create an unpleasant or hostile situation for especially by uninvited and unwelcome verbal or physical conduct

See b2? No requirement of repetition. From Collins https://www.collinsdictionary....

Harassment is behaviour which is intended to trouble or annoy someone, for example repeated attacks on them or attempts to cause them problems.

The repetition is only in the example, not the definition.

The free dictionary https://www.thefreedictionary....

1. To subject (another) to hostile or prejudicial remarks or actions; pressure or intimidate.

Meaning 1 of the 3 listed does not require persistence.

And that's before we get on to the legal defintion of things which are quite specific and not 100% wat you expect.

Either way, not everyone, including respectable dictionaries (go on argue that you're a more authoratative source than Collins or Mirriam Webster) do not agree with your very narrow defintion.

An individual satisfies the signing requirement when someone who has been duly authorized to sign for him does so. In the event a statute mandates an instrument be signed in person, the signature must be made in the signer's own hand or at his request and in his presence by another individual.

- source

Artwork is also commonly created from paper and ink. People wear bracelets and necklaces most commonly as jewelry, but sometimes as medical alerts. The medium doesn't determine whether it's art or a document, the context does. Someone who tattoos a signed Do Not Resuscitate on themselves as artwork is best removed from the gene pool anyway. No harm, no foul.

Unless you can point to a statute wherein we've waived Sovereign Immunity for that exact type of lawsuit, that would violate the 11th Amendment:

The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or Equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State.

https://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/11th+Amendment

You miss just one little thing. Virtual reality glasses, not the monstrosities but compact fixed view glasses, no bigger than regular glasses with lenses fitted by an optometrist, ground to suit your vision and with a fabric shroud over the glasses and pulled up to your face to exclude external light sources as an option. So those glasses can effectively put a virtual high resolution 125'' screen right in front of you and you can hook the glasses to a smart phone. So portable hooked to servers can work and of course servers are Linux and portable is Android so Windows is dead and not to be missed after windows anal probe 10.

M$ was repeatedly warned by the market that the abuses of windows 10 would kill the windows phone and they choose to ignore those warnings, instead relying on their arrogance to what, I don't know, they clearly did not know, and their arrogance did nothing but kill windows phone. First blow, Windows 8 trying to force a mobile phone interface on desk top users to force acceptance of the windows phone interface and then the mass invasion of privacy of windows 10, where they call invasion of privacy telemetry and pretends it means nothing 1. The science and technology of automatic measurement and transmission of data by wire, radio, or other means from remote sources, as from space vehicles, to receiving stations for recording and analysis. http://www.thefreedictionary.c..., basically phone tapping with a fancy name. They should have provided a secure edition of Windows 10 over a year ago, they did not, so fuckem.

Judging by Slashdot, many people would rather breathe Elon Musk flatulent.

I think you mean flatus.

The guy that said Article 1 Section 1 was correct:

All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.

To illustrate the problem, let me suggest something Trump could do:

Trump wants Congress to pass a business tax cut. But why bother with Congress? The President could simply direct the IRS to issue rules telling companies to pay their taxes as if the rate were 15% instead of 35+%. Along with your business taxes, include a letter asking for a binding settlement. The IRS settles with delinquent taxpayers all the time, often for much less than the amount owed. Trump could direct the IRS to automatically settle for 15%. Why shouldn't he do this?

Because the US Constitution is to be obeyed, not worked around.

The President takes an oath to "faithfully" execute the office. Creating workaround schemes to circumvent Congress is executing the office in bad faith.

Firstly, 'Probable Cause' only applies to criminal cases not civil cases.

Actually ...

Probable cause is a level of reasonable belief, based on facts that can be articulated, that is required to sue a person in civil court or to arrest and prosecute a person in criminal court.

Being in possession of copyrighted media is not illegal, especially as there are a number of perfectly legal ways that media could have been obtained.

Depends on the material. If it's material that you would have obtained via the circumvention of copyright protections (ie DeCSS) that is illegal.

It is the act of unauthorized reproduction or distribution that is copyright infringement

The question is would that be enough evidence to file a civil suit in court. Considering that they've been able to use IP addresses connected to torrents to file lawsuits, I think I'll error on the side of caution.

How is this whistleblowing ? That's only when illegal activities are going on, no ?

Glad you asked, and happy to provide an answer: Whistleblowing: The disclosure by a person, usually an employee in a government agency or private enterprise, to the public or to those in authority, of mismanagement, corruption, illegality, or some other wrongdoing.

So no, not only when illegal activities are going on. And here's a bonus for the "he's an at-will employee, so the company can fire him for any reason without recourse" crowd:

Persons who act as whistleblowers are often the subject of retaliation by their employers. Typically the employer will discharge the whistleblower, who is often an at-will employee. An at-will employee is a person without a specific term of employment. The employee may quit at any time and the employer has the right to fire the employee without having to cite a reason. However, courts and legislatures have created exceptions for whistleblowers who are at-will employees.

Additional information available here.

exegesis noun
1. Critical explanation or analysis:
annotation, comment, commentary, interpretation, note.
2. Something that serves to explain or clarify:
clarification, construction, decipherment, elucidation, explanation, explication, exposition, illumination, illustration, interpretation.

Incidentally, it's your own literacy regarding the range of proper usage of terms that needs work. Unless, you want to deny you were "explaining or clarifying" anything, which, admittedly, would be a plausible claim.

WTF do "success traits in more nomadic societies" have to do with modern human life?

This is a facile argument.
The point is not that we need nomads in modern society. It's that such deviant personalities and traits allow humanity to adapt to new situations. You're not trying to say that human evolution is and should be at a complete halt are you?

Except your god seems to be some vague feeling that "nature knows best".

Straw man. Try again.

I don't know what you mean. I don't know why you think Republicans need to have money in the Senate? They clearly do, much more than you.

Unless you don't understand the meaning of the expression, which given your "skill" as a writer wouldn't surprise me, askance.

http://idioms.thefreedictionar...

So again, you respond with near-incomprehensible word salad, and you think you made a point.

We haven't yet begun unraveling you, Chris.

...are next. So Democrats can communicate with their namesakes.

What does "increased in gauss" mean?

Pardon my awkward syntax; Gauss is the measurement of magnetic strength. Once the Gaussian field reaches a certain level, poles are formed. I don't know what the level required is, but it is true nonetheless. This is basic physics.

Are there no poles when only so little magnetism is present?

Yes. Below a certain level there, apparently, are no poles.

Eddy currents in what? Doesn't a current require some sort of conductor?

Eddy currents do not need a conductor nor medium, any more than magnetism itself does. They exist where (and because) the lines of force intersect with the poles -- or more nearly correctly, with an imaginary line drawn between the poles.

The poles create the currents and then those currents cause the poles to rotate? How/why?

See above. Eddy currents are coincidental with the erection of poles; they are not exactly caused by the poles. See any basic physics text which covers magnetism. Since they are energetic in a state in which there is no matter (yet) the energy created (released?) must act on something; the magnetic field is the only thing which exists, so this energy must either cause it to rotate or to expand (since there are no molecules to vibrate yet, there cannot be heat). I choose rotate because the math of the speed of expansion of the universe requires rotation rather than linearity. In either case, rotation or expansion make a magnetic field move, which field started as a stationary one.

But a rotating magnetic field is moving, so it can create a universe.

Why?

Both matter and energy, according to the Standard Model, are moving electromagnetic fields. This is basic quantum theory stuff. A stationary magnetic filed is not moving, so it causes no matter nor energy. Matter-and energy are moving magnetic fields. In a nutshell, increasing magnetism could have resulted in the creation of magnetic poles in nothingness (a stationary magnetic field), and coincident eddy currents, which caused the system to begin rotation.

a tangent curve is simply a sine wave as viewed from outside the system.
Could you explain this?>>

This comes from basic trigonometry. A sine curve is side a of a triangle over side b as the angle between them changes. A tangent curve is side c divided by side a. In searching to understand this, I discovered an article describing the tangent as being "outside" of the system of side a and side b, mathematically speaking. Since the effect of "dark matter-energy" is to increase the speed of expansion of the universe, which has been experimentally shown, graphing that increase would yield a curve that is not sinusoidal, but tangential. This would cause the universe to seem to have begun from a big bang, but only if it were observed from outside of the universe itself. That the universe is a virtual or apparent one is not an original thought of mine, but is fairly commonly-held by some physicists nowadays.

This does away with not only pi
Why? >>

Because a rotating universe can best be described in radians rather than degrees. Since a radian is 360 degrees/2pi, any pi factors in measurements will cancel out.

but also "dark matter/energy".

Why?/

What is called dark matter and dark energy is a construct to explain the increasing velocity of the expansion of the universe. If I am right, then the increasing velocity is an illusion caused by our being outside the actual universe and which makes simple rotation (sine curves) seem like tangent curves. See a book on trig or visit this site http://encyclopedia2.thefreedi....

You seem to be referring to the principle of a law being arbitrary and capricious, but laws are very rarely struck down on these grounds.
More likely, someone with a good lawyer appeals a conviction based on what satisfies "careless or imprudent", cites that there's nothing to be cited, and therefore no basis for establishing the existence of "careless or imprudent", the judge shrugs and throws out the conviction. Once this catches on, cases will be dismissed outright unless a cop presents evidence that's really compelling that might persuade a judge to go on record that "careless or imprudent" is satisfied (i.e., judge-made law, as a result of poorly worded law passed by the legislature), or the legislature gets its act together, tells the wireless lobby to "stuff it", and amends the law to define what the hell "careless or imprudent" actually means.
But that's just my opinion. :P

http://legal-dictionary.thefre...

Ok, and? Please explain the relevance of your link. If you don't understand why I and hopefully everyone else feel it has no relevance, it's because what the courts say a word means has shit all to do with what Facebook was thinking when they came up with their verbage.

... for a court to be putting into a "like" button.

For one thing, does "liking" using the button imply endorsement? Does "like" mean what they think it means? Or was the person's intention? And what if it was inadvertent clicking?

What if the button was called "interesting..." instead?

You would think that a court would restrain itself and hesitate to rule, given so many possibilities of meaning and ambiguities here...

http://legal-dictionary.thefre...