Slashdot Mirror

Nobody reads individual sentences from other books and then takes them (often out of context) as individual snacks of wisdom and truth.

Uh, yes they do. All they time. What is the modern news cycle but a collection of individual sentences (often out of context) from longer speeches or documents, then repackaged as eye catching headlines?

If you want to get more literary, I invite you to read the words of Shakespeare and find out just how many of his individual sentences have passed into common wisdom and truth .

What a crock of shit. Australians have been using munted in the sense of "fucked up" since at least the 80's with no racist undertones.
It's normally used to describe levels of drunkenness.
"Did you see Davo last night? He was fucken munted!"

See also: http://www.yourdictionary.com/...

Looks like the kind of problem that can only be settled by a statistical survey of dictionaries! Your definition seems to be about half of them, so half the population are wrong-headed freaks such as yourself. Amusingly, this one explicitly includes higher education.

Make mine with Santorum! Yum!

You're correct. The notion that Shakespeare invented words is baseless and a barefaced lie. We must castigate people who violate fair play by spreading this sanctimonious nonsense, even though they are multitudinous /s

http://grammar.yourdictionary....
http://shakespeare-w.com/engli...

And yeah, I realise 'invented' and 'first known user of' aren't quite the same thing.

Yes, I did. Once again the pedant fails pedantry. Read and learn. When you attempted the same statement, you managed both a run-on and a failure to terminate.

...In English, you capitalize most words in a title. See for example.

I would actually really appreciate if Slashdot would switch to plain sentence case for all article titles. It is usually much easier to read, in particular for technical stuff where it is often difficult today to tell if some word is a company name or some tech thingy.

Also you don't need to capitalize each word. This is English, not German.

In English, you capitalize most words in a title. See for example.

Nazis, aka National -Socialists-, are NOT far right.
They are of the Left. Perhaps right of communism

That's one of the greatest cons ever. They adopted socialist policies to gain popularity - typical demagogue stuff, promise to bring all the jobs back, blame all the problems on some identifiable group (the Jews) etc. Once they got into power they forgot all that stuff and enacted far right policies, which was their intention all along, and forgot about the socialist stuff.

Those right-wing views like gun confiscation?

Saying things like "we are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system", that kind or right-wing talk?

Or maybe your just another leftist "progressive" trying to whitewash Germany's National SOCIALISTS.

Actually, it's millions,

No - in the story in question, it is billions... You may want to familiarize yourself with the concept of paraphrasing.

It's makes you writing much more interesting and relevant when using old quotes.

Let's review your words:

As the old saying goes: Billions for defense, but not one cent for tribute!

Unfortunately for you, this expression means you're claiming the old saying follows your own words, so sorry, Superkendall, but in the old saying, it is, in fact, millions, making you mistaken.

You may wish to familiarize yourself with the XYZ Affair. It was actually an attempt to foment hawkish aggression in the matters of the nation, a less desirable goal than many people realize.

Now if you had initially indicated you were deliberately modifying it, you'd be believable since you'd be establishing your alteration from the start, but you didn't phrase yourself in such a way. Furthermore, your reaction is to attack by characterizing the person, rather than simply claim you were editing it, while lacking in further content and examination yourself. Thus making it more likely you didn't actually know you were misquoting it, and are just uselessly trying to insist you meant to change it all along, in a defensive reaction since you can't just admit to the error due to your own ego. Sorry, but that's the consequences of your choice to

Next time, however, if you do not wish to be shown to be mistaken so easily, consider that the problem was your choice of expression. You'll be less likely to sound foolish.

Anyway, here are some more words to consider:

HENRY FORD TO PUSH WORLD-WIDE CAMPAIGN FOR UNIVERSAL PEACE

Will Devote Life and Fortune to Combat Spirit of Militarism Now Rampant.

LAUGHS AT THOSE WHO PREDICT SUCCESSFUL INVASION OF U. S.

Scores Hypocrites Who Pretend to Be Religious, Yet Foster War For Sordid Gain.

"I will do everything in my power to prevent murderous, wasteful war in America and in the whole world; I will devote my life to fight this spirit which is now felt in the free and peaceful air of the United States, the spirit of militarism, mother to the cry of 'preparedness' preparedness, the root of all war."

These words, uttered Saturday by Henry Ford, hater of war and visualizer of vast foresight, marked the beginning of what will henceforth be the life-work of the man to strike with everything he commands at what he declares to be the direct cause of all wars and all national antipathies that breed war "preparedness."

"I would teach the child at its mother's knee," said Mr. Ford, "what a horrible, wasteful and unavailing thing war is. In the home and in the schools of the world I would see the child taught to feel the uselessness of war; that war is a thing unnecessary; that preparation for war can only end in war.

Will Give Much to End Wasteful "Preparation"
"I have prospered much, and I am ready to give much to end this constant, wasteful 'preparation.' Not by building palaces of peace, not by inspiring fearful peace by powerful armament, but by teaching the men, women and children of America that war does not threaten us, that war will not reach us, that the fullness of peace is their inheritance, not the burden of militarism with its heavy hand that curbs liberty and its foul sustenance upon the blood, the labor and the toil-earned happiness and goods of the worker.

Entire World United in Demand for Peace
"This I would make a world work, for all the world cries for peace, and there can be no peace wh

Actually, it's millions,

No - in the story in question, it is billions... You may want to familiarize yourself with the concept of paraphrasing.

It's makes you writing much more interesting and relevant when using old quotes.

You mean CEOs like Martha Stewart?

For the children, of course.

The B in "breaking" has nothing to do with "breaking" anything except the plane. Well, pretty much. That's the simplest way to think of it. If you push a door open (even if it was ajar) then you're still breaking and entering. If you pushed open a gate, you're still breaking and entering. Think of it more like breaking the plane than breaking an object. Even deception is considered breaking and entering. Lemme find you a link...

Here:
http://www.legalmatch.com/law-...

This includes one definition that is the older form (we're talking archaic almost - these laws and interpretations have changed since before I was a kid and I'm nearing 60):
http://www.yourdictionary.com/...

Some areas will vary, of course. So, if you're going to go engage in criminal acts you should contact a lawyer to ensure you're breaking the minimal number of laws. I guess, don't go breaking the law. Anyhow, I'd have figured people knew this by now but you're the second person that I noticed who remarked on this. You're still breaking and entering - just by opening the door. To do so means your hand will have likely passed the threshold/plane. So, not even entering the building might net you a breaking and entering charge. (It's usually a misdemeanor. The burglary, after that, is what's usually a felony.)

Yes a little more and he will throw down his gage.

humm.. it appears to be a word.

A story where "ur mom " would actually be a relevant comment.

As verbs:
Cause = effect
Alter = affect

http://grammar.yourdictionary....

It's fuzzy, but I think 'effect' would have been the better choice (and not worrying about it at all might have been an even better option for the AC higher in the thread :).

(Different AC)

It is 100% "proper grammar", and an online article from a magazine editor isn't enough to change that.

I've always been more a fan of "they" for a singular person of undetermined gender but "he" has been around for far too long to start calling it wrong.

from the first page of results for googling "he or she grammar"

It's more than just writer's digest.

Here

If your child is thinking about a gap year, ? can get good advice from this website.

A researcher has to be completely objective in ? findings.

In the past, people tended to use the pronouns he, his, him, or himself in situations like this:

If your child is thinking about a gap year, he can get good advice from this website.

A researcher has to be completely objective in his findings.

Today, this approach is seen as outdated and sexist. There are other options which allow you to arrive at a ‘gender-neutral’ solution, as follows:

You can use the wording ‘he or she’, ‘his or her’, etc.:
If your child is thinking about a gap year, he or she can get good advice from this website.

A researcher has to be completely objective in his or her findings.

and here

He or She in Unknown Gender

For years, if the gender of an individual referred to in a sentence is unknown, “he” would be used as the generic pronoun.

“We don’t know who started the fire,” a police officer might say, “but he will be held responsible.”
It is understood, by both the police officer and any listeners, that “he” could refer to either a woman or a man.

However, as culture changes, so does the language along with it, and many believe that the exclusive use of “he” for a person of unknown gender is sexist. There are a few options in this situation.

An archaic way of dealing with the issue is to use “one,” as in “One never knows what one can expect.”
Using this pronoun is often clunky and results in some strange-sounding sentences.

“He or she” can be used in moderation, but it cannot be used too many times at once: “he or she knows that if he or she needs to talk, he or she can visit his or her professor.”
Some use “they,” but this word cannot be used with a singular antecedent—it is only used with plurals.

and

Traditionally, he and him were used to refer to both genders in formal writing:

If anyone has any evidence to oppose this view, let him inform the police immediately.

Nowadays, we often see gender neutral forms (e.g. he or she, he/she, s/he, (s)he, they and him or her, him/her, them) when we do not know if the person referred to is male or female:

The bank manager could help with your problem. He or she will probably be able to give you a loan. (or he/she will probably be able to or they will probably be able to )

Go to a hairdresser. Ask him or her to come up with a style that suits you, your hair, your lifestyle. (or ask him/her to come up with a style or ask them to come up with a style )

When you get into the building, go to the person on the desk in the reception area. They can tell you where to go. (or He or she can tell you where to go.)

Language changes. There are plenty of words that previous generations used (eg: the "N" word, "Mistress" for the female head of the house) without a second thought - but usage has changed.

Scientists want to build themselves pyramids as burial tombs?

Hey there this should help you out

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P... {wiki Pharaoh}

http://examples.yourdictionary... {Analogy examples for kids}

While I'm not sure how many football fans are here on Slashdot, there are always plenty of Monday morning quarterbacks.

You can't be serious. Have you ever seen an X-ray tube? Not even remotely close to a CRT in appearance, construction, or function.

Here's a description and illustration of a typical X-ray tube: http://www.xradia.com/technology/basic-technology/sources.php
And here's a CRT: http://images.yourdictionary.com/cathode-ray-tube

Is that so?

http://www.yourdictionary.com/hording

First hit in google?

Don't be stupid, he's already said he works for PayPal, which would pretty much break the first rule of shilling, wouldn't it? Or perhaps you don't actually know what the word "shill" means, but are simply repeating it as it's such a popular slashdot insult.

I've been unable to respond to this until now but I know exactly what a shill means. I also know that the wikipedia definition you list isn't the only definition. Try this second definition: http://www.yourdictionary.com/shill

The GP repeatedly said he/she was proud to work for EBay but would like to hear why people dislike the company. When people responded with their reasons he/she argued that they must be incorrect then listed several DIFFERENT so called "personal experiences" as the only experience the GP had had dealing with said company. Those are out and out lies, as far as I'm concerned, which is why I called the person a shill.

And Newton copied it from this http://images.yourdictionary.com/images/computer/_PROGMAN.GIF

It goes all the way to PARC. It's remarkable how similar the UI in computers and phones are to the PARC UI. Metro seems to be the only design that goes away from it.

From yourdictionary.com:

"nimrod (nmrd)
noun
1.also Nimrod A hunter.
2.Informal A person regarded as silly, foolish, or stupid.
Origin: After Nimrod. Sense 2, probably from the phrase “poor little Nimrod,” used by the cartoon character Bugs Bunny to mock the hapless hunter Elmer Fudd."

I used the casual or slang form. I know who Nimrod was from the Bible.

"I won't call you a punctuation nazi, because Nazis at least made an effort to know their own rules."

I have. You are wrong, and Purdue has its head up its ass. Here are just a few other references:

Grammar Book

Your Dictionary

Davis School District K-12 usage guide

Georgia Southern University Writing Center

In Wikipedia's entry on it, the mentions of using it for plurals lack citations. But the refutations of those usages do have citations.

The vast majority of evidence and authority is on my side. You lose. Try again.

What are some of the benefits that we could see with it? Well:
-Bare metal hypervisors. Imagine being able to boot up linux and windows side-by-side and not have to worry about setting up any sort of virtual machine. You could switch between the two using a keyboard combo. Or even being able to setup a COW copy of windows so cleaning up your mom's copy of windows is as easy as hitting a few keys and setting it back to a known clean state...

Oh, like ESXi? No, wait, you said no virtual machine... wait, what? Hypervisor = Virtual machine control system.

Your "insta-clean" windows can be accomplished with drive imaging, or "freezing".

-Improved device support. Devices could use a standardised interface on the "bios" level so that windows/linux/osx would just need a simple driver layer to talk to the device. Device manufacturers could provide what basically amounts to a shim to load into the UEFI which provides the mapping between the actual device and the standardised hardware interface. Of course this may run into issues such as non-standard or extended features but this could be taken care of with extensible interfaces.

Are you advocating an OS-independent version of DirectX for bare metal? Or are you describing how BIOS already operates?

In short, either you have no idea what you're talking about, or you're simply unaware that what you're describing is already in existence (and, indeed, is the way it already works).

http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/socialism
http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/american/socialism
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism
http://www.collinslanguage.com/results.aspx?context=3&reversed=False&action=define&homonym=-1&text=socialism
http://encarta.msn.com/encnet/features/dictionary/DictionaryResults.aspx?refid=1861709575
http://www.yourdictionary.com/socialism
http://www.wordsmyth.net/?ent=socialism

All say that government owns the means of production. Aka government run.

Means nothing. If a resource is available in the US thats not or not timely available here, the system will pay for the patient to get care in the US. If someone wants to pay for a US service, then they are free to do that as well.

it means something if you die waiting. It means something if your town has lottery to determine who gets a family doctor. It means something if your life threatening illness is somehow classified as optional.

All of which are very real scenarios in canada.

And I've never stated that the US system was a good system. Well, it was 70 years ago or so. right now, the US lacks almost any market forces to get prices low.

I have a right to grow my own food if I like. I dont have to buy food if I dont want to. I can also pick up free food at the food bank if I wanted.

I can make clothes or get free clothes from charities. Water is free since it falls from the sky. Electricity is a commodity, not a right, but I can go off grid and make my own from wind or solar.

Which is my point. You don't have a right to those things. You don't have a right to other people's services.

You realize that eye surgery was perfected in communist Russia (almost no Russians wear glasses) and the biggest Lasik company is Canadian?

And that changes what? We get lots of things from outside the US.. the prices don't go down in other areas of healthcare.

I didn't just make it up, actually. Here, I'll save you the trouble of Googling for the definition of ever yourself.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ever
http://www.yourdictionary.com/ever
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ever

Please notice the definition "at any time" and "at all". At any time means past, present and future. Does the word "ever" always mean this definition by default? No, but context clues were not provided for any other definition.

Ironic that you post anonymously. LOL.
But I'll bite.

1) If one lives in Monaco, or Germany, or Serbia, traveling to another country is trivial; one might even point out that in some Euro countries, one CAN'T drive an hour in any single direction without traveling internationally. For most of the US, traveling internationally is major exercise. The distance comment doesn't explain Australia, but my answer there would be to ask a question that applies to both Australia and Europe: how much vacation time do you get?

2) Going to Canada (Montreal aside) is pretty much the same as most of the US (or parts), and frankly speaking the bulk of Mexico is a shathole I wouldn't WANT to visit (again, much like parts of the US). The regional variation within the US is fading, certainly, but the cultural differences between a New Englander, an Oklahoman, and a Californian used to be (language mostly notwithstanding) easily comparable in scope to that of Germans v. Dutch, or Swedes v. Danes. It might also have to do with Americans' lack of roots - I'd guess that most Americans have significantly changed their place of residence, moving more than 100 miles, at least once within the last 5-10 years. Not sure that's true for other cultures, and would directly speak to ones' inclination to 'see other places'.

And truth-in advertising: I speak 3 languages, have had a passport for 30 years, and have visited 49 states to one degree or another, as well as visiting every country in Western Europe save Portugal, a good handful of E European countries, Japan, Taiwan (only a day), and Singapore. I've worked for a European company now for nearly 18 years, with much of my job being the 'interpretation' of expectations between a Central European multinational and their US customers, despite both sides of the table speaking very fluent english. I think I can speak authoritatively on the characteristic differences between Americans (generally) and Europeans (generally) that I've observed.

Oh, and by the way, I appreciate your effort to correct my grammar, but I did indeed mean 'provincial' precisely as I used it: http://www.yourdictionary.com/provincial - provincial (pr vinshl, pr-), adjective
1. of or belonging to a province
2. having the ways, speech, attitudes, etc. of a certain province
3. of or like that of rural provinces; countrified; rustic
4. designating or of a style, esp. of 18th-cent. European furniture, that was characteristic of the provinces and was a simpler and plainer copy of the style characteristic of the capital and cultural centers
5. narrow; limited; unsophisticated: a provincial outlook

I might add another definition: 6. assuming that someone else's use of a word in a way one is not familiar with must be inherently wrong without bothering to look it up oneself; subsequently misinterpreting and extrapolating one's assumption, inflating it into a general condemnation of an entire other culture's use of language when it remains one's own failure. ...but that might in fact be parochial.

If you have a bar code reader, or online bar code reader application, you can read the barcode yourself.

Or, you know, eyes. http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/upc-ch.jpg

Of course if the number is just a nonce, it won't actually tell you anything interesting.

PPS: the word you're looking for is "affect".

Actually, no. One of the meanings of "effect" is as a transitive verb: to bring about; to produce as a result; to cause. Eg. to effect a compromise. Or indeed, to effect change. See http://www.yourdictionary.com/effect This is different to "to affect change", which means "to have an effect on change".

Same place I get that water is wet, fire is hot, sky (on Earth) is bluish color and other hard to find information.
It is common sense.

Or, you can look it up.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fame

http://www.yourdictionary.com/fame

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fame

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

Now, I might be nieve but why can't these memory aligning tricks be done in the kernel naively?

What does the fact that you might be a fist ( http://www.yourdictionary.com/nieve )have to do with doing something naive in the kernel?

If you have to use magnetic containment to keep the reaction going, it's not a star. "Star" is not a synonym for "nuclear fusion reaction" - except in breathless news reports written at a primary school reading level.

If the physical location isn't far enough, one disaster could affect both locations.

Fixed that for you. Please learn the difference between affect and effect.

Windows 95 is a
32-bit shell for a
16-bit extension to an
8-bit operating system designed for a
4-bit microprocessor by a
2-bit company that can't stand
one bit of competition.

(stolen from http://lists.gnupg.org/pipermail/gnupg-users/2003-May/018396.html)

Also, "two-bit" means "(1) cheap; gaudy; tawdry; or (2) Mediocre, inferior, or insignificant".

(stolen from http://www.yourdictionary.com/two-bit. Try to find the definition in-between all the ads.)

Informative? WHAT THE FUCK.
You're 100% WRONG, dipshit.
Spanning IS JBOD! JBOD IS spanning!

http://www.yourdictionary.com/telecom/jbod

http://searchstorage.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid5_gci343350,00.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels#Concatenation_.28SPAN.29

"an application of computer hardware" is a completely unidiomatic expression; no eductated native speaker would use it. Even if it wasn't, you should learn that certain words used in a specific technical context have a meaning different from their common meaning as used by laymen like yourself.

http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/A/application.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_applications
compare with
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system

http://www.yourdictionary.com/application

http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/51745

Do you see word, excel and powerpoint on here? http://marketshare.hitslink.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=8

What does 'arse' has to do with ANYTHING I have said?

One, you claimed that because a word exists, it means you're free to invent meanings for it. When (or if) you grow up you'll lear that it's called "giving a counter example".

Two, everything you said and ever will say is shit, because you're the worst kind of thick bastard - the kind who doesn't realise it.

So on the evidence, it's you that can't speak English, you arrogant little pillock.

Main Entry: -fold
Function: suffix
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English -feald; akin to Old High German -falt -fold, Latin -plex, -plus, Old English fealdan

1 : multiplied by (a specified number) : times --in adjectives "a sixfold increase" and adverbs "repay you tenfold"
2 : having (so many) parts "threefold aspect of the problem"

see also: http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/-fold
http://www.yourdictionary.com/fold-suffix
or many of the links here.

It has nothing to do with folding things in half.

It is nice to be able to say that that's all eugenics means but it isn't accurate.

No. It is accurate. I am working with the accepted definitions from various online dictionaries. I cannot find a single one that does not have the limitation of selective breeding.

And the parents that use this clinic are selecting which fertilized eggs will be used. No government is dictating which eggs they can and can not use.

• MSN Encarta: "selective breeding as proposed human improvement: the proposed improvement of the human species by encouraging or permitting reproduction of only those people with genetic characteristics judged desirable. It has been regarded with disfavor since the Nazi period."
• Merriam-Webster: "a science that deals with the improvement (as by control of human mating) of hereditary qualities of a race or breed"
• Cambridge: "the study of methods of improving humans by allowing only carefully chosen people to reproduce"
• Websters: "the movement devoted to improving the human species through the control of hereditary factors in mating"

Only the first one says parents may not be self selecting, though it does say eugenics is looked on unfavorably since the NAZIs.

Falcon

*sigh* You really are a pedantic tosser. Try this definition, or this one.

I expect they start with legal bribes, price structures effecting both the vendors larger systems and the smaller ones

Usage of affect vs. effect.

(Not to mention the omission of an apostrophe and misplacement of the definite article in the second half of the coordination conjunction.)

No, this likely won't have any affect.

Affect-Effect

Actually, "Norse" is probably the correct word, based on your description:

Norse (nÃrs)

adjective

        1. Scandinavian; specif., medieval Scandinavian
        2. West Scandinavian (Norwegian, Icelandic, and Faeroese)

noun

        1. the Scandinavian group of languages
        2. the West Scandinavian group of languages
        3. Norwegian

Dude ... the term is used exactly as it is supposed to in the summary...

"This week's Google outages left several Google Apps admins in the lurch - and many of them [use hindsight in criticizing] their advocacy for making the switch to hosted apps, InfoWorld reports."

Try knowing what the heck you're talking about another time.

Okay, look. The word "monopoly" has as its prefix the stem "mono-," from the Greek, meaning "one." That means there can only be ONE "monopoly."

A phrase such as "monopolistic company LIKE Versign..." is absurd on the face of it. If there are other companies LIKE Verisign, then there is no monopoly.

OK then it's an oligopoly. Same difference (How's that phrase for clear communication?)

You have a small club of companies that can issue certificates. No other company can enter the club. The oligopolistic companies have almost all the advantages a monopolist would have. This point, at least is valid in the article.

Oddly, the word "rhetoric," also from the Greek (rheteros, "a speech") used to be a positive appellation for the study of good, clear communication of thoughts and ideas. But it has also succumbed to the buzz-word dementia, and now usually means "empty words."

Uh, please check your facts before you post. The word is Greek, but comes from rhetor meaning orator or teachecr of rhetoric. Rheteros does not mean anything in Greek or English as far as I could find.

How sad.

Indeed.

True: a good point remains a good point, but bad spelling truly reduces your credibility. It indicates lack of respect for the reader. That's why a resume or motivation letter with a spelling mistake usually ends up filed vertically. (Oh, and I didn't see the AC post, or I would have abstained from commenting on that same mistake.)

There doesn't pass a day that I see these kind of mistakes (that do pass spell checkers, by the way) and it simply hurts to read those comments. Perhaps it's because I'm not a native speaker, I don't know. You should at least take a look at 100 most often misspelled words in English.

The simple rule with writing is: if you have even the faintest doubt, look it up. Often typing "define: $WORDINDOUBT" into Google will already clear it up.