Exactly. That's one of the things that have always pissed me off about foreigners. You get these people who say, "You and your compatriots are ignorant of geography," just because we don't know the names of the continents; yet when you ask them to name the streets in my neighbourhood, they say, "what does it matter?". I hate ethnocentrism, but only when it's other people's. Maybe in my country people have better things to do than stare at "maps" and "books".
Let us be honest here, we are not going to get attacked from some long range ICBM from around the world.
Of course not; you're right. This raises the question of what it is for. The obvious answer is that it is for attack, not defence. Without such an anti-missile weapon, the US cannot attack strong targets. With such a weapon, the US can carry out unprovoked aggression on another country, and shoot down that country's counterattack. The talk of "defence" is for public consumption only.
Argg, I hate to do this but... "Whom is the better?"? First, a browser is a thing, not a person, so you are correct with your 'which is a better browser?'. Secondly, even you were talking about people it would be 'who is the better?'. Just remember, replace the who/whom with he/him. If you would use he, who is correct. If you would use him, whom is correct.
Moreover, "the better" is only correct if there are only two options. He meant "Which is the best?".
For me, professionalism isn't anything to do with money. It's about doing a job properly. I used to work as a shop volunteer for Oxfam, and I always acted in a professional manner, no different from if I were being paid.
Certain Easter eggs are juvenile and unprofessional, and I would prefer them not to be present in software I use, whether proprietary or Free. If a programmer wants to make a space invaders game, let him do so... and release it as such. There is no stifling of creativity. It is a good idea to stick to the Unix philosophy of each program doing a specific thing in a streamlined, efficient manner.
As shocking as it may seem to those who have drunk the marketing kool aid
For the love of God, can we please stop using that metaphor? When you think of all that it implies, it's literally sickening...
More to the point, it just doesn't make sense. People (well, Americans) use it to mean "have joined the cult", but the cultists didn't drink that stuff as part of an initiation ceremony, and it had no brainwashing drugs in it. It was something they finally took to kill themselves.
When accusing someone of fanaticism, saying "you've drunk the Kool-Aid" makes as much sense as "you've shot yourself".
Moreover, it was actually Flavor Aid.
It rather reminds me of those people who talk about "steep learning curves".
What is that gibberish supposed to mean? Christ, I hate mock-Latin. If you want a fancy-sounding term referring to repeating something again and again, use ad nauseam.
There really are two attitudes that one can have to open-source software. Firstly, one can consider that it ought to be just as good as proprietary software, and one day replace it. Alternatively, one can consider that, as a hobby thing, anything goes.
If you have the first attitude, we can discuss the pros and cons of programs, as people interested in technology are wont to do. If you have the second attitude, your opinion on everything is predictable, and you therefore contribute nothing by opening your mouth.
I find it a little annoying that OpenOffice has an entire Space Invaders game in it (put =GAME("StarWars") in any Calc cell) when the suite is so slow and bloated. It makes the statement that they they don't care about streamlining.
If you use the term to refer to any word with more than one morpheme, then you have made the term meaningless, as virtually all words in virtually all languages are thus.
I am obviously using the term to refer to neologisms formed by clumsily chopping up two existing words (e.g. mimsy, mochaccino, acupressure or chocoholic). This is Carroll's meaning, and I don't see anyone would try to muddy the waters by using it in a different sense.
Such words are usually slang, affectations, pseudo-science or marketing-speak. So, a pet-hate against them, or an opposition to their use in standard English, is unremarkable.
What idiot invented the word "demosaicing"? What is it to "demosaice" something? Oh, you mean "demosaic".
What happens to "panic" when you put "-ing" on it? You get "panicking". If you wrote "panicing", it would be the -ing form of to "panice".
Moreover, the "de-" at the beginning makes it look like something to do with demo[nstration]s. When you invent a neologism by means of prefixes, you ought to make it clear, with hyphens.
So, try "de-mosaicking". It's still a monstrosity, but less so than before.
This word, together with the "unlzmaing" message that the kernel spat at me the other day on Puppy Linux, is why techies should not be allowed to invent words.
I wasn't sure how to say "to welcome", so I looked it up. It literally means that I order them greeted. I don't know it is an authentic idiomatic expression, or a mistake in the dictionary. Either way, take it up with Collins.;-) Perhaps we could just go with "salueo".
I was just thinking that I'd like to see an online, Google-Docs-style version of LyX.
Or even just add LaTeX to Google Docs. There could be a source code pane and a display pane, which would update every few seconds. Just click on Export to get a version in.doc,.rtf,.odt,.pdf,.dvi,.ps...
That's because "virus" in Latin is neuter, while "vir" is masculine. The Latin plural for "virus" is "vira" (in the nominative, anyway).
Wrong. "Virus" in Latin had no plural. It was a mass noun meaning "poison", "foulness". One can guess at what the plural form would have been ("vira", "virus", "virua"...) but you cannot state it as a fact.
In English, its plural is "viruses". In Latin, it had no plural. I actually don't mind "viri" too much. It's naive, but a reasonable mistake to make, given precedents such as "cacti". What annoys me is "virii", which is just idiotic.
I wish I'd linked my first "No" to Wikipedia, to nip this thread in the bud.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. That's one of the things that have always pissed me off about foreigners. You get these people who say, "You and your compatriots are ignorant of geography," just because we don't know the names of the continents; yet when you ask them to name the streets in my neighbourhood, they say, "what does it matter?". I hate ethnocentrism, but only when it's other people's. Maybe in my country people have better things to do than stare at "maps" and "books".
Let me give you a hand there.
Let us be honest here, we are not going to get attacked from some long range ICBM from around the world.
Of course not; you're right. This raises the question of what it is for. The obvious answer is that it is for attack, not defence. Without such an anti-missile weapon, the US cannot attack strong targets. With such a weapon, the US can carry out unprovoked aggression on another country, and shoot down that country's counterattack. The talk of "defence" is for public consumption only.
Argg, I hate to do this but... "Whom is the better?"? First, a browser is a thing, not a person, so you are correct with your 'which is a better browser?'. Secondly, even you were talking about people it would be 'who is the better?'. Just remember, replace the who/whom with he/him. If you would use he, who is correct. If you would use him, whom is correct.
Moreover, "the better" is only correct if there are only two options. He meant "Which is the best?".
For me, professionalism isn't anything to do with money. It's about doing a job properly. I used to work as a shop volunteer for Oxfam, and I always acted in a professional manner, no different from if I were being paid.
Certain Easter eggs are juvenile and unprofessional, and I would prefer them not to be present in software I use, whether proprietary or Free. If a programmer wants to make a space invaders game, let him do so... and release it as such. There is no stifling of creativity. It is a good idea to stick to the Unix philosophy of each program doing a specific thing in a streamlined, efficient manner.
available != default
As shocking as it may seem to those who have drunk the marketing kool aid
For the love of God, can we please stop using that metaphor? When you think of all that it implies, it's literally sickening...
More to the point, it just doesn't make sense. People (well, Americans) use it to mean "have joined the cult", but the cultists didn't drink that stuff as part of an initiation ceremony, and it had no brainwashing drugs in it. It was something they finally took to kill themselves.
When accusing someone of fanaticism, saying "you've drunk the Kool-Aid" makes as much sense as "you've shot yourself".
Moreover, it was actually Flavor Aid.
It rather reminds me of those people who talk about "steep learning curves".
Repeato ad absurdium...
What is that gibberish supposed to mean? Christ, I hate mock-Latin. If you want a fancy-sounding term referring to repeating something again and again, use ad nauseam.
How unprofessionnal from Microsoft would you then say ?
What part of "yes" do you not understand?
There really are two attitudes that one can have to open-source software. Firstly, one can consider that it ought to be just as good as proprietary software, and one day replace it. Alternatively, one can consider that, as a hobby thing, anything goes.
If you have the first attitude, we can discuss the pros and cons of programs, as people interested in technology are wont to do. If you have the second attitude, your opinion on everything is predictable, and you therefore contribute nothing by opening your mouth.
You should read Altered Carbon.
Yes, and it seems very unprofessional of them.
I find it a little annoying that OpenOffice has an entire Space Invaders game in it (put =GAME("StarWars") in any Calc cell) when the suite is so slow and bloated. It makes the statement that they they don't care about streamlining.
It's amazing the excuses people will make for corporate misbehaviour. It's a sort of Stockholm Syndrome on a societal scale.
If you use the term to refer to any word with more than one morpheme, then you have made the term meaningless, as virtually all words in virtually all languages are thus.
I am obviously using the term to refer to neologisms formed by clumsily chopping up two existing words (e.g. mimsy, mochaccino, acupressure or chocoholic). This is Carroll's meaning, and I don't see anyone would try to muddy the waters by using it in a different sense.
Such words are usually slang, affectations, pseudo-science or marketing-speak. So, a pet-hate against them, or an opposition to their use in standard English, is unremarkable.
"Solaris" is a reference to the Sun (and by extension, to Sun Microsystems) in Latin. "Ubuntu" is Zulu for humanity.
An elegant blend would be "Ilanga" (Zulu for Sun) or "Humanitas" (Latin for Ubuntu).
Don't mind me. I just hate portmanteaux.
What idiot invented the word "demosaicing"? What is it to "demosaice" something? Oh, you mean "demosaic".
What happens to "panic" when you put "-ing" on it? You get "panicking". If you wrote "panicing", it would be the -ing form of to "panice".
Moreover, the "de-" at the beginning makes it look like something to do with demo[nstration]s. When you invent a neologism by means of prefixes, you ought to make it clear, with hyphens.
So, try "de-mosaicking". It's still a monstrosity, but less so than before.
This word, together with the "unlzmaing" message that the kernel spat at me the other day on Puppy Linux, is why techies should not be allowed to invent words.
The best addition you could make to a grenade is a feature whereby it blows up killing the person who thought it was OK to throw a grenade at someone.
I wasn't sure how to say "to welcome", so I looked it up. It literally means that I order them greeted. I don't know it is an authentic idiomatic expression, or a mistake in the dictionary. Either way, take it up with Collins. ;-) Perhaps we could just go with "salueo".
No, not Linux, but his laptop is a Mac, so he is running a form of Unix, at least.
I'm surprised it hasn't been mentioned so far!
Or, better still, AD 1.
Ego saltem nouos Romanos dominos nostros saluere iubeo.
The population of Rome (the city) at its height was ~1 million (around 0 CE IIRC).
There was no "0 CE". Try 1 AD.
I was just thinking that I'd like to see an online, Google-Docs-style version of LyX.
Or even just add LaTeX to Google Docs. There could be a source code pane and a display pane, which would update every few seconds. Just click on Export to get a version in .doc, .rtf, .odt, .pdf, .dvi, .ps...
That's because "virus" in Latin is neuter, while "vir" is masculine. The Latin plural for "virus" is "vira" (in the nominative, anyway).
Wrong. "Virus" in Latin had no plural. It was a mass noun meaning "poison", "foulness". One can guess at what the plural form would have been ("vira", "virus", "virua"...) but you cannot state it as a fact.
In English, its plural is "viruses". In Latin, it had no plural. I actually don't mind "viri" too much. It's naive, but a reasonable mistake to make, given precedents such as "cacti". What annoys me is "virii", which is just idiotic.
I wish I'd linked my first "No" to Wikipedia, to nip this thread in the bud.
viruses (virii?)
No.