Slashdot Mirror

Well, I'll give you this -- you're dogged. A simple review of any dictionary (OK, any english dictionary) shows that effect, in fact, can be used correctly as a verb, although that usage is less common (but not uncommon) than when the term is used as a noun. You may not like it, but what can you do?

Note that when "effect" is used as a verb it is *not* synonomous with "affect". To EFFECT a change is to initiate a change. To AFFECT a change is to influence a change. It's never correct to interchange these two words. This may be where we misunderstand one another.

"Affect" can also be used as a noun (usually meaning emotional demeanor). ("The patient's affect was flat and lifeless.") This is a rarer usage, but perfectly correct. Again, however, "affect" is not interchangable with the word "effect".

There's a concise discussion at:

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/affect.html

I was a proofreader in another life -- if I were going to hand out grammar tips as the OP does, I'd at least try to make sure they were accurate (and to spell "grammar" correctly). I mean, how annoying would it be if I ended every post with:

Grammer tip: "pickle" must never be used as a verb.

I'd recommend "Common Errors in English usage" instead. It has an online version. Specifically, look for the "its/it's" page. Nah, better not slashdot it. Here's the page:

The exception to the general rule that one should use an apostrophe to indicate possession is in possessive pronouns. Some of them are not a problem. "Mine" has no misleading "s" at the end to invite an apostrophe. And few people are tempted to write "hi's," though the equally erroneous "her's" is fairly common, as are "our's" and "their's--all wrong, wrong, wrong. The problem with avoiding "it's" as a possessive is that this spelling is perfectly correct as a contraction meaning "it is." Just remember two points and you'll never make this mistake again. (1) "it's" always means "it is" or "it has" and nothing else. (2) Try changing the "its" in your sentence to "his" and if it doesn't make sense, then go with "it's."

See also apostrophes.

I'd recommend "Common Errors in English usage" instead. It has an online version. Specifically, look for the "its/it's" page. Nah, better not slashdot it. Here's the page:

The exception to the general rule that one should use an apostrophe to indicate possession is in possessive pronouns. Some of them are not a problem. "Mine" has no misleading "s" at the end to invite an apostrophe. And few people are tempted to write "hi's," though the equally erroneous "her's" is fairly common, as are "our's" and "their's--all wrong, wrong, wrong. The problem with avoiding "it's" as a possessive is that this spelling is perfectly correct as a contraction meaning "it is." Just remember two points and you'll never make this mistake again. (1) "it's" always means "it is" or "it has" and nothing else. (2) Try changing the "its" in your sentence to "his" and if it doesn't make sense, then go with "it's."

See also apostrophes.

So they have a million already, and more coming in. I'd say that suits them just fine. Why would they lose that on the gamble they might make more? Or are you a psychic now? Showing off your fortune telling abilities? I'd say they are ultra conservatives which means they don't like risks. Oh and by the way, with the process you keep prattling on about like a stuck record, where is their ISO number? What, no recognised quality standards? What a shock.

And its forty, you illiterate moron.

What a turkey.

I tried paint.net a while ago and it was ok. Might be worth checking out. I don't know if they are going to charge for the final version or not but at least this is free in the meantime... as long as you don't mind the expiry crap.

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/carrot.html

An explanation of the derivation of the term, that points out the common fallacy of thinking it's a "carrot on a stick"

From the American Heritage Dictionary: http://www.bartleby.com/61/89/C0128900.html

There are, of course, professionals in etymology that disagree, but it's generally accepted as reward/punishment, not unreachable reward.

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/carrot.html

An explanation of the derivation of the term, that points out the common fallacy of thinking it's a "carrot on a stick"

I could never get to grips with Photoshop, I've tried a few times since Photoshop 4.0 was around..

I've always stuck with PaintShop Pro, I find it a lot easier to use and has masking, layers blah blah all that stuff, I guess it's 70% of Photoshop but I find it a lot more intuitive, until version 9 that was...then it went a bit like Photoshop and got harder to use, I'll be sticking with version 8.

I don't want to buy a $50 book or read a 800 page PDF just to learn how to use some software so I can create banners/buttons/edit photos/mess around with graphics etc..

I'm a geek, I just want to use it.

For non tech people I usually give them ACDSee or Picasa, it suites most of their needs.

As for the people recommending Paint, they should check out Paint next generation, Paint.NET!

http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net/

Try paint.net. It's a pretty badass little program that has gone through a few iterations. I was involved in its inception last year.

He obviously hasn't used Paint.NET. http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net

And does anyone even read his column when it's not on the front page of /. ?

Well, for quick touchups I use the free program paint.net from Washington State University. Quick, simple, some power under the hood (it does layers!) and has more features than I know how to use.

I've downloaded GIMP... had no idea what to do with it so after a couple sessions of randomly pushing buttons left it sit to gather stray 0s and 1s that collect on my HDD much like the dust gathers on my Windows 95 MCP book.

Rediculous?

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

Ridiculous!

aaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I've studied Japanese history, both as to culture and economics. I've also done considerable business with Japan and as a consequence had the opportunity to travel in Japan. Having the above to go on I can give only a loose analogy in answer to your post.

First I think it's instructional to come to know Tokugawa Japan, and, as an added bonus, Tokugawa Ieyasu is an intriguing character. At first glance it might seem Tokugawa Japan would suggest by way of it's hierarchical, caste rigidity to lend weight in favour of your post, but I'd like to draw an analogy between the warring factions that predate the Tokugawa Shogunate. Japan, I think, has much in common with the preindustrial tribal factions of western europe, and, by way of a long reach, with Protestanism.

The Roman Empire failed, for many reasons, to dominate northern Europe, with the exception of Britain. I think it was the strifeful nature of warrior culture where the idea of a king was more akin to an agreed upon battle leader whose 'kingship' lasted only as long as the war. This allowed the northern european tribes to withstand Rome's onslaught. This same reluctance to bow to one kingly overlord is exemplified in Protestant refusal to bow to the Roman Catholic Church and, by way of M Luther to see it as the right of each individual to read from the Bible their own truth.

Generally, I suspect there's an underlying like current in Japan's culture to allow for pluralism. It's useful to remember that the Emperor worship of Japan as an ancient practise is in large part a fiction. I don't want to go any further afield so, as it stands, this is my best short reply to your post.

now back to my book

cheers

...or don't want some custom jerry rigged solution.

It's either jury-rigged or jerry-built. English is fun.

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/jerry.html

And also for the last time: it raises the question. "Begs the question" means something entirely different.

I wish people would either learn how to use English or shut the fsck up.

An argument that improperly assumes as true the very point the speaker is trying to argue for is said in formal logic to "beg the question." Here is an example of a question-begging argument: "This painting is trash because it is obviously worthless." The speaker is simply asserting the worthlessness of the work, not presenting any evidence to demonstrate that this is in fact the case. Since we never use "begs" with this odd meaning ("to improperly take for granted") in any other phrase, many people mistakenly suppose the phrase implies something quite different: that the argument demands that a question about it be asked--raises the question. If you're not comfortable with formal terms of logic, it's best to stay away from this phrase, or risk embarrassing yourself.

I think we actually agree. Neither is science! So if they're going to speculate to students about how life came into being, might as well mention that God could be as good a reason as comet (which just moves the problem off planet). But maybe I'm missing the point about the whole school controversy.

The controversy is that supporters of ID are trying to take over the teaching of science with mumbo jumbo. Saying evolution can't explain complex organisms and that some Intelligent Designer is needed isn't science. If the people who want to teach this then they can teach it in a philosophy or comparative religion class. If they want to teach that though then they need to teach other views as well. Here's one I like, The Navajo Creation Story. Or how about the Zuni Creation Cycle.

Entomologists have named a louse and a butterfly after Larson.

Don't forget about Sexy Losers (DNSFW)

Sorry, I'll always think of it as "The Thin H Line". But I agree, one of the best out there. Oddly, I consider the total NSFW-ness of it almost irrelevant to the humor, but not gratuitous fan-service (Hmm, that sounds like a contradiction, but I stand by it).

But since this seems to have devolved into a "my favorite webcomics" listing, I might as well plug my personal favorite...

Unicorn Jelly, by Jennifer Diane Reitz (You might recognize the name from the credits (design) of a number of EA, Epyx, Interplay, and other old-school games). The story has sadly finished, and you should only read this one from the beginning, but well worth a few hours of your life.

Initially about a rebellious young witch (think " LeGuin's Disposessed applied to Wicca" rather than Wendy or Sabrina), it evolves into a tale of rationality applied to a superstitious world facing an unavoidable cataclysm... With a hint of Abbott's "Flatland" thrown in for spice. One of its most fascinating points (to me, anyway) - Although you need suspension of disbelief to allow the strip's universe to exist in the first place, once you accept that, you won't find many points to nitpick about. The strip's world has distinctly different physical rules than our world, yet remains internally consistent to the point that the author has worked out actual laws of physics and entire ecosystems suited to those laws.

Rather than messing with the GIMP on Windows, I prefer to use Paint.NET for my light graphics needs. It's not as powerful as Photoshop or the GIMP, but it is quite nice and available under an MIT license.

I've downloaded GIMP... had no idea what to do with it so after a couple sessions of randomly pushing buttons left it sit to gather stray 0s and 1s that collect on my HDD much like the dust gathers on my Windows 95 MCP book.

PS, for the windows users out there looking for a free alternitave to GIMP, check out Paint.NET

Wow, way to pimp out your own website when you could have just direct linked to the Paint.NET Website.

Sad but true. I don't know if your post deserves an "Insightful" or a "Funny." For an example of state-funded "art" that looks HORRIBLE, see here. That thing is ugly as sin. It's one of the major reasons I chose not to go to WSU :-)

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/taken.html

There are statistical tests for the "under selection" part. here's the first summary I found. It changes the frequencies of nearby neutral mutations which get to "ride the coat-tails" of the advantageous mutation.

The "related to brain size/function" is somewhat speculative, in that the gene could have additional unknown functions.

That the mutation makes us smarter is much more speculative. (Indeed, I don't think the paper's authors went this far.) It could, for example, make us 0.1% less smart, but reduce the brain's metabolic cost by 0.5%.

(Note: I've only read the linked article, not the scientific paper.)

1) Neanderthals lasted until only 30,000 years ago - that's recent enough for DNA to survive
2) The DNA can be used to clone new Neanderthals, using other primates as host mothers.
3) Neanderthals were intelligent, with brains larger than the brains of most modern humans.
4) Because they're not human, they do not have human rights, and can be patented.
5) The patent-holder would license them to do jobs that humans don't want, for less than minimum wage!
6) Profit!

For Paint.NET v2.2 we are using code signing (http://www.eecs.wsu.edu/paint.net -- Alpha 1 was released on Monday). Every update that is downloaded by the app must be signed and the signature's cert must validate up to a trusted root before it will be installed. We are doing this mostly to prevent users from accidentally installing updates that we didn't release (hax0red DNS or network setups). This isn't a perfect solution, of course, but far better than naively not doing anything.
This post is made "AS IS" with no warranties, and confers no rights.

Begging a question is asking a question that implicitly assumes something is true that the author is trying to get you to believe. See also http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/begs.html

That would make the sentence mean you are responsible for what your users choose to do with it, which is arguably false.

--dave

market place for the Dave Winer's of this world, its just that their audience

If less geek blogging means fewer misused apostrophes, I'm all for it.

market place for the Dave Winer's of this world, its just that their audience

If less geek blogging means fewer misused apostrophes, I'm all for it.

I submit that the submitter is an idiot, and doesn't know how to use "beg the question" properly. Therefore, the submitter has no business talking about intelligence of either sex.

Beg the question:
An argument that improperly assumes as true the very point the speaker is trying to argue for is said in formal logic to "beg the question." Here is an example of a question-begging argument: "This painting is trash because it is obviously worthless." The speaker is simply asserting the worthlessness of the work, not presenting any evidence to demonstrate that this is in fact the case. Since we never use "begs" with this odd meaning ("to improperly take for granted") in any other phrase, many people mistakenly suppose the phrase implies something quite different: that the argument demands that a question about it be asked--raises the question. If you're not comfortable with formal terms of logic, it's best to stay away from this phrase, or risk embarrassing yourself.

link

Yeah, I'm a nitpick :)

The original and only sensible version of this saying is "You can't eat your cake and have it too," meaning that if you eat your cake you won't have it any more. People get confused because we use the expression "have some cake" to mean "eat some cake," and they therefore misunderstand what "have" means in this expression.

http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/eatcake.html

You misspelled "all intensive purposes".

Oh, I'm not ALWAYS a pedant. You just happened to be an unfortunate random victim ;)

And yes, once one gets past your distracting misusage of the English language (your grammar is fine), you make some excellent points.

...And, I'm sorry, but piqued really is the word with the meaning you were looking for, being that to peak something is absolutely meaningless unless one uses fuzzy logic to interpret it to mean pique. Here's another page on the topic...

Fatal error encountered, aborting reading!

Line 2: fatal basic grammar error (illegal possessive apostrophe)

doesn't want Continental to provide free wireless service to the members of it's frequent flier club.

Line 3: fatal basic grammar error (illegal possessive apostrophe)

Massport claims Continental's free service interferes with it's pay service.

A solution is available for your errors: go back to school.

For future reference, see this document.

• I could care less.
• Same difference.
• irregardless

I don't find that use of "amount" to be uncommon.

Yeah thanks for that useful reply, I've never heard of sarcasm before, thanks for pointing that out.

This gives you an understanding of how I think the phrase works and why it doesn't make much sense to me in it's current form.

This indicates that both forms are used in America (I'm from New Zealand), but that the form excluding the not is just American.
An interseting quote from this site being: And because it is hard to be sarcastic in writing, it loses its force when put on paper and just ends up looking stupid. In such cases, the older form, while still rather colloquial, at least will communicate your meaning--at least to those who really could care less

This meanwhile says that it's just careless to exclude the not.

Still I never realised that "I could care less" meant the same as "I could not care less", good to know.

http://www.wsu.edu:8080/~brians/science_fiction/ma rtian_chronicles.html#third

Jewish? Try Babylonian.

Fatal error encountered, aborting reading!

Line 2: fatal basic grammar error (illegal possessive apostrophe).

Yahoo has released a beta version of it's toolbar for Firefox. The new toolbar is available for Windows, Mac, and Linux.

A solution is available for your error: go back to school.

For future reference, see this document.

Fatal error encountered, aborting reading!

Line 2: fatal basic grammar error (unauthorized possessive apostrophe).

There's going to be a lot of homage's and tributes in here.

For future reference, see this document.

read up on the meaning of irony
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/ironically.html

Three leters for you.... G N U.
Don't be a word nazi

Of course you know you won't get an arguement out of me. Neither of us is looking for this mystical "karma". I just noticed it is being used to reduce the number of people seeing your post simply because the moderator disagrees with the message. After re-reading the link in my sig, you might see me using the pirate metaphor a lot. It's a perfect definition. So, I'll begin here by saying that what we are seeing is the same old continual warfare amongst pirates that has been going on for millenia. The real kind that kill for money. This whole US/China/national anything is so irrelevent. These are just plain ol' thieves robbing the world where ever they go. There will be no attacking anywhere as long as business can continue uninhibited. Unless one side can see an obvious advantage. The moment a blockade of any kind goes up, then all bets are off.

I'd have to say that misspellings and grammatical errors eat away at the credibility of anything that I'm reading, Slashdot comments included. However, I do recognize that a lot of times people who know better will slip and either simply press the wrong key or transpose words in their mind, but will recognize the error when it is pointed out. (I've had more than one e-mail where someone has quoted my original message, and I'll cringe at an error that I made that they may not have even noticed.)

I do believe that it's important for people to be able to recognize their errors like this, and this means paying attention, and, as some others have suggested, reading. Not just reading on the Internet, where proofreading is often given low priority (sometimes even for respectable journals), but reading print, including books, magazines, etc.

One particularly great guide is Paul Brians' "Common Errors of English Usage", available online at http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/ or in print at Amazon.com. It shows, not only improper usage, but many instances of proper usage that are incorrectly assailed by would-be nitpickers.

Personally, I'm trying to fight a one-man war to restore the proper usage of "where're/where are" in plural items... ("Where're the kids" -- not "where's the kids".) Drives me crazy every time I hear this one, and twice as crazy every time I find myself using it.

Oh, and for anyone planing to nitpick my use of periods outside of quotation marks: It's British practice; I just happen to prefer it over the American practice. Don't worry: I'm sure an actual error slipped through somewhere. ;-)

In the words of Mussolini:
Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power.

Here is an interesting little page that diagrams the links between all of these people.

"Alot" is not a word. Neither is "alittle."

It's impossible to have a society without money.

You probably mean "impractical". I wouldn't call anything impossible. See The Dispossessed.