Thus nobody wsing a burka will die of cancer, get infected with STD or drown, since they are almost completely shielded from EM radiation at those levels.
They will also refrain from perpretating drug dealing and terroris... oops|
They now suggest the slightly longer route, going north through Alaska, Siberia, the Urals, European Russia, Poland, Germany, Belgium and France. One only has to swim two short 20 miles journeys: one at the Bering Straight and the other at the Channel.
You may only swim once if you consider walking besides the Eurotunnel tracks.
Unfortunately, no laws will be passed to demand such specifications. More and more the devices we own are software layers over generic digital hardware (FPGA, microcontrollers). The companies are quite jealous of the intellectual property therein.
I did not mean, however, hardware support when I spoke about harsh times at Linux sound. Imagine you want to have skype rings, your favorite game and rhythmbox sound at the very same sound card. What a nightmare! On Windows, it is out of the box. If there was a standard sound server on Linux (being it jack, pulseaudio, don't know what else), all the applications would code to it. Now, Skype supports alsa (and bad), your game is likely to support only/dev/dsp, rhythmbox supports esd. If you bring up skype, forget the rest of the audio,
Bring us good sound and good, straightforward printing (CUPS is getting there) and the best desktop will be ours. BTW, I use 90% of my time Linux and open source tools, with the exception of the mechanical CAD.
As a Linux user from 1993, I am afraid that the truth is that Windows is quite good at two areas (besides markrting and Fud): printing and sound.
I bet all users have had problems with applications like skype locking the sound card out. I bet they have had all the sorts of trouble when printing.
CUPS is a good help, and basically done it right. Pulseaudio is a configuration nightmare, so is Arts and alsa and whatever. The truth is this: we must have for sound a free desktop standard everybody and anybody must use. Werther it is promoted from an existing sound server or build a new one from default, the truth is that sound is still an area that all UNIX based desktops find lacking.
Free Desktop is quite good at making up good standards. For instance, take D-BUS: activation and instrumentation done right. Fix a good sound server, promote CUPS to a standard to be used to print from any application (instead of system ("lpr...")), and maybe we can tell the world aloud KDE or GNOME or XFCE or whatever running under X is capable of taking on Windows.
Believe me, from the point of view of the cow, it will not be considered a punishable work to eat the fresh green grass and then crap it away.
By the way, the methane from cow dung will be around 240g/Kg of dry fecal matter, but from vegetal sources will be less than 150g/Kg, if the memory serves me correctly.
I understand your point, but I am not in full agreement with it. Before, to clear up, the saxons came from where is the Netherlands today, invading Britainnia after the leave of the romans. Saxons do have a language, but english has more latin and nomand constructions than saxonic. One, for instance, does not put the verb of subordinate orations at the end.
At the very end, a language is a tool. It allows me to understand what you think, and tell you my mind. A language (particularly written language) is also meant to preservante one's tought. If the language change, new generations will be somewhat or even totally deprived of the comprehension of the message. No archeologist can read iberian characters, and only at the 19th century egiptian characters have been understood.
So, if you change the language needlessly, it will deprive you and your descendents of the comprehension of the written language from the forefathers. Just remember how difficult it was to you to read Jeffrey Chaucer or William Shakespeare, how easier it is to read Mark Twain and how easy to read Hemingway, Paul Aster or Stephen King.
It is true that ultimately the language will change. As civilisations evolve, languages acquire expressions and words from other languages. However, one good measure of literacy of one society is the stabilisation of the language and the proper use and ortographical correctness by the learning generations. As for the acronyms, why would not the s be capitalised? What if the acronym is HMS (A ship from the british navy). Will you pluralise it as HMSs?
BTW: one acronym everyone uses is TEA: meaning once transporte de ervas aromáticas, being T.E.A. marked onto the crates that transported tea leaves from the Orient to England. The acronym means, in portuguese, aromatical herbs transport.
As far as I know, english is still one indoeuropean language. I was referring to the acronym usage in british english, where the oldest and more reputable forms of expression do not pluralize acronyms.
They invented the language, didn't they?
One of the signs of the degenerescence of the north american literacy is the treatment they give to the language (it's your language!), submitting it to the equivalent of pulley treats. The neologism of pluralising acronyms is a clamourous example. If one tries to find a pluralised acronym on one of the oldest IBM manuals, one cannot.
As a former professor, I can witness the level of degenerescence of the writing capabilities and bad style, syntaxis and ortography of the average college student. I am a native portuguese speaker, and I tell you that what goes on with portuguese, english, french, spanish and italian youth is a civilisational retrocess.
As late as 1986, english, portuguese and all other manuals I know taught the use of acronyms as I have said. Then came generation MTV (my own), X, Y, Z and finally the cro-magnons have returned when thought extinct;-)
Ultimately, english will evolve into another language and the present day english will be as strange to a year 3000 speaker as latin is to a today's spaniard or middle english to a british today. Of course, the writing of a language and the aphabetisation and the media, these all promote the perenisation of english. But in an era of k-sms writing, and given the rampant functional illiteracy of most under 30, as seen from english natives writing on Slashdot, I think all civilisation conquests we have amassed from the high middle ages 'till today may die off in a couple of generations.
That worries me both as a parent and as an avid reader.
In a globalisation era (not the first), languages will die off. What did the etruscans spoke in Italy before the romans, or the iberans in Spain? Nobody knows. Languages will always die off, because ultimately a language is a tool that allows me to talk to the other. While it is true that a language promotes of at the least shows a particular view on an universe, it would be quite stupid if I invented a language nobody could speak but me just to show my view of the universe.
Ultimately, like in the roman empire (I have read onve about the roman acculturation in my region), or in Africa today (lived there), people communicate in two or three languages: the mother tongue (used by the family), the neigburhood tongue and the official tongue (french, english, spanish or portuguese in Africa and greek or latin in the old roman empire).
I do not pity thus when a tongue becomes extinct. It just served no purpose to the people, so they left it in their own will. All I wish is that the language is recorded, both in writing and phonographic form, for future reference from archeologists and historians. And then, may it die in peace. What I would not like at all is someone impose me the language I should speak because my tongue, that serves me no more, is about to get extinct, coming from english speakers, whose tongue s not and is more useful as a transmission languages.
BTW, I speak fluently four tongues, and speak and write well three more.
DISCLAIMER: I am as pro-american as one can be. I am also a citizen from the European Union.
The poor are never counted when one politician makes a decision. That is why they promise and lie.
The politicians ASK the poor for the votes, so they can get into power. I think the film that Eddie Murphy
made about getting into congress is pretty much accurate. The problem is not GETTING into power, is being strong
enough to lobby the elected into doing one's will. And let's face it, either is Europe or US, the system is quite
favourable to those that own land, being the new land access to the media and the opinion makers. Which is clearly something an indigent or a poor has not.
Don't even try to get me started about Africa. I have lived in RDC (old Zaire) and Cameroon. Those two countries do have elections, which they call democratic elections too.
Considering that the particle demo means the land owner classes (not slaves nor serfs) in ancient greek,
the term democracy (the power of the owner classes) may fit here very well.
Which democracy does give voice to the poor? Does anyone remember the film Zapata?
Biblefish translations to spanish says something like This building _is being looked at_ by Surveillance Cameras (lit.) Any illegal activity will be registered and taken _the_ police. So, you actually register the activities, but take the police away, not the activities to the police.
Better is the portuguese translation: This building is taked attention by Surveillance Cameras. All illegal activity (that is allright for brasilian portuguese) will be recorded and the police will be examined.
Italian and german seem to be more or less OK. The french translation is also understandable.
Slashdot Mirror
Because now all child porn will be put out of it's misery!
Thus nobody wsing a burka will die of cancer, get infected with STD or drown, since they are almost completely shielded from EM radiation at those levels.
They will also refrain from perpretating drug dealing and terroris... oops|
Francisco Colaço
And Cicero will collect Royalties from Lucasfilm. The phrase is a paraphrasis of Cicero's words, said when Julius Caesar was made emperor.
Do you actually think the guys in Hollywood ever came up with something original since the retirement of the Marx Brothers?
Francisco Colaço
They now suggest the slightly longer route, going north through Alaska, Siberia, the Urals, European Russia, Poland, Germany, Belgium and France. One only has to swim two short 20 miles journeys: one at the Bering Straight and the other at the Channel.
You may only swim once if you consider walking besides the Eurotunnel tracks.
FHC
Unfortunately, no laws will be passed to demand such specifications. More and more the devices we own are software layers over generic digital hardware (FPGA, microcontrollers). The companies are quite jealous of the intellectual property therein.
I did not mean, however, hardware support when I spoke about harsh times at Linux sound. Imagine you want to have skype rings, your favorite game and rhythmbox sound at the very same sound card. What a nightmare! On Windows, it is out of the box. If there was a standard sound server on Linux (being it jack, pulseaudio, don't know what else), all the applications would code to it. Now, Skype supports alsa (and bad), your game is likely to support only /dev/dsp, rhythmbox supports esd. If you bring up skype, forget the rest of the audio,
Bring us good sound and good, straightforward printing (CUPS is getting there) and the best desktop will be ours. BTW, I use 90% of my time Linux and open source tools, with the exception of the mechanical CAD.
As a Linux user from 1993, I am afraid that the truth is that Windows is quite good at two areas (besides markrting and Fud): printing and sound.
I bet all users have had problems with applications like skype locking the sound card out. I bet they have had all the sorts of trouble when printing.
CUPS is a good help, and basically done it right. Pulseaudio is a configuration nightmare, so is Arts and alsa and whatever. The truth is this: we must have for sound a free desktop standard everybody and anybody must use. Werther it is promoted from an existing sound server or build a new one from default, the truth is that sound is still an area that all UNIX based desktops find lacking.
Free Desktop is quite good at making up good standards. For instance, take D-BUS: activation and instrumentation done right. Fix a good sound server, promote CUPS to a standard to be used to print from any application (instead of system ("lpr ...")), and maybe we can tell the world aloud KDE or GNOME or XFCE or whatever running under X is capable of taking on Windows.
Francisco Colaço
Believe me, from the point of view of the cow, it will not be considered a punishable work to eat the fresh green grass and then crap it away.
By the way, the methane from cow dung will be around 240g/Kg of dry fecal matter, but from vegetal sources will be less than 150g/Kg, if the memory serves me correctly.
It has been sufficiently observed in field that cows still crap during monsoon season.
I used to live in Africa, twice on past jobs. I tell you, when it rains there, there is no way to charge a battery from photovoltaics.
I understand your point, but I am not in full agreement with it. Before, to clear up, the saxons came from where is the Netherlands today, invading Britainnia after the leave of the romans. Saxons do have a language, but english has more latin and nomand constructions than saxonic. One, for instance, does not put the verb of subordinate orations at the end.
At the very end, a language is a tool. It allows me to understand what you think, and tell you my mind. A language (particularly written language) is also meant to preservante one's tought. If the language change, new generations will be somewhat or even totally deprived of the comprehension of the message. No archeologist can read iberian characters, and only at the 19th century egiptian characters have been understood.
So, if you change the language needlessly, it will deprive you and your descendents of the comprehension of the written language from the forefathers. Just remember how difficult it was to you to read Jeffrey Chaucer or William Shakespeare, how easier it is to read Mark Twain and how easy to read Hemingway, Paul Aster or Stephen King.
It is true that ultimately the language will change. As civilisations evolve, languages acquire expressions and words from other languages. However, one good measure of literacy of one society is the stabilisation of the language and the proper use and ortographical correctness by the learning generations. As for the acronyms, why would not the s be capitalised? What if the acronym is HMS (A ship from the british navy). Will you pluralise it as HMSs?
BTW: one acronym everyone uses is TEA: meaning once transporte de ervas aromáticas, being T.E.A. marked onto the crates that transported tea leaves from the Orient to England. The acronym means, in portuguese, aromatical herbs transport.
Francisco
Agreed. Good point.
Francisco
As far as I know, english is still one indoeuropean language. I was referring to the acronym usage in british english, where the oldest and more reputable forms of expression do not pluralize acronyms.
They invented the language, didn't they?
One of the signs of the degenerescence of the north american literacy is the treatment they give to the language (it's your language!), submitting it to the equivalent of pulley treats. The neologism of pluralising acronyms is a clamourous example. If one tries to find a pluralised acronym on one of the oldest IBM manuals, one cannot.
As a former professor, I can witness the level of degenerescence of the writing capabilities and bad style, syntaxis and ortography of the average college student. I am a native portuguese speaker, and I tell you that what goes on with portuguese, english, french, spanish and italian youth is a civilisational retrocess.
As late as 1986, english, portuguese and all other manuals I know taught the use of acronyms as I have said. Then came generation MTV (my own), X, Y, Z and finally the cro-magnons have returned when thought extinct ;-)
Francisco
To your information, in no european language the acronyms pluralise.
So 1 CD, 2 CD, 3 CD, 1000 CD and so on.
The new Chicago Manual of Style FAQ says otherwise, but it is a neologism without justification.
For instance, if one acronyms lethal virus, whose plural is lethal virii as LV, should the plural be:
Francisco
Ultimately, english will evolve into another language and the present day english will be as strange to a year 3000 speaker as latin is to a today's spaniard or middle english to a british today. Of course, the writing of a language and the aphabetisation and the media, these all promote the perenisation of english. But in an era of k-sms writing, and given the rampant functional illiteracy of most under 30, as seen from english natives writing on Slashdot, I think all civilisation conquests we have amassed from the high middle ages 'till today may die off in a couple of generations.
That worries me both as a parent and as an avid reader.
In a globalisation era (not the first), languages will die off. What did the etruscans spoke in Italy before the romans, or the iberans in Spain? Nobody knows. Languages will always die off, because ultimately a language is a tool that allows me to talk to the other. While it is true that a language promotes of at the least shows a particular view on an universe, it would be quite stupid if I invented a language nobody could speak but me just to show my view of the universe.
Ultimately, like in the roman empire (I have read onve about the roman acculturation in my region), or in Africa today (lived there), people communicate in two or three languages: the mother tongue (used by the family), the neigburhood tongue and the official tongue (french, english, spanish or portuguese in Africa and greek or latin in the old roman empire).
I do not pity thus when a tongue becomes extinct. It just served no purpose to the people, so they left it in their own will. All I wish is that the language is recorded, both in writing and phonographic form, for future reference from archeologists and historians. And then, may it die in peace. What I would not like at all is someone impose me the language I should speak because my tongue, that serves me no more, is about to get extinct, coming from english speakers, whose tongue s not and is more useful as a transmission languages.
BTW, I speak fluently four tongues, and speak and write well three more.
DISCLAIMER: I am as pro-american as one can be. I am also a citizen from the European Union.
The poor are never counted when one politician makes a decision. That is why they promise and lie.
The politicians ASK the poor for the votes, so they can get into power. I think the film that Eddie Murphy made about getting into congress is pretty much accurate. The problem is not GETTING into power, is being strong enough to lobby the elected into doing one's will. And let's face it, either is Europe or US, the system is quite favourable to those that own land, being the new land access to the media and the opinion makers. Which is clearly something an indigent or a poor has not.
Don't even try to get me started about Africa. I have lived in RDC (old Zaire) and Cameroon. Those two countries do have elections, which they call democratic elections too.
Francisco
Considering that the particle demo means the land owner classes (not slaves nor serfs) in ancient greek, the term democracy (the power of the owner classes) may fit here very well.
Which democracy does give voice to the poor? Does anyone remember the film Zapata?
Francisco
Biblefish translations to spanish says something like This building _is being looked at_ by Surveillance Cameras (lit.) Any illegal activity will be registered and taken _the_ police. So, you actually register the activities, but take the police away, not the activities to the police.
Better is the portuguese translation: This building is taked attention by Surveillance Cameras. All illegal activity (that is allright for brasilian portuguese) will be recorded and the police will be examined.
Italian and german seem to be more or less OK. The french translation is also understandable.
Francisco