While these three terms are related, their meanings are subtly different. To help understand the distinction, we consulted a number of sources -- American Heritage Dictionary, the Yahoo! Grammar, Usage, and Style category, and web search results for the three terms.
The dictionary defines a "metaphor" as a figure of speech that uses one thing to mean another and makes a comparison between the two. For example, Shakespeare's line, "All the world's a stage," is a metaphor comparing the whole world to a theater stage. Metaphors can be very simple, and they can function as most any part of speech. "The spy shadowed the woman" is a verb metaphor. The spy doesn't literally cast his shadow on the woman, but he follows her so closely and quietly that he resembles her own shadow.
A simile, also called an open comparison, is a form of metaphor that compares two different things to create a new meaning. But a simile always uses "like" or "as" within the phrase and is more explicit than a metaphor. For example, Shakespeare's line could be rewritten as a simile to read: "The world is like a stage." Another simile would be: "The spy was close as a shadow." Both metaphor and simile can be used to enhance writing.
An analogy is a bit more complicated. At the most basic level, an analogy shows similarity between things that might seem different -- much like an extended metaphor or simile. But analogy isn't just a form of speech. It can be a logical argument: if two things are alike in some ways, they are alike in some other ways as well. Analogy is often used to help provide insight by comparing an unknown subject to one that is more familiar. It can also show a relationship between pairs of things. This form of analogy is often used on standardized tests in the form "A is to B as C is to D."
Serious question: It seems like it could be possible to use an infinite number of colors with interpolated laster on pulse modulation to transmit an infinite amount of information. Why won't this work?
It makes me sad that you were modded interesting. Your argument is shortsighted blather with a whiff of ad hominem.
We all know what space is (huge, mostly empty, dangerous) but only you fail to acknowledge what it isn't. (an unsurmountable obstacle) People like you tried to stopped people from flying. The fact that technology isn't advanced enough to conquer space* without unacceptable sacrifice proves nothing about tomorrow.
*Yes I said "conquer space". There are tremendous resources to be exploited and a universe of possibilities and I'm sorry you're too stuck in your pessimism to see that.
The issue would be one of power. Law of conservation of energy and all that. Any people living on such a rock need energy to move around talk, and go about their daily lives. That energy has to come from somewhere. In our own cases, that's easy: 99% of the energy we use traces back to the sun in some way or another (geothermal is about the only naturally harnessable source that isn't solar - nuclear fission is available to societies that behave well, or already have The Bomb).
So in the end, such a rock would be useless as a vessel unless it had a very active internal heating source, plenty of nuclear material, or hydrogen where the using society had hydrogen fusion technology. Even with that, I'd wager it'd be mighty hard to support a population of any size for too long.
A small and widely dispersed group of people in a population valuing something is enough to make it valuable. If enough geeks value it (will give wealth to get the currency) that's enough. Let me give you an example: you probably have little use for an unused transmission from a 1949 Jaguar XK120. Only a guy working with classic cars would want it.
But if you had such an item you wouldn't give it away would you? Even though you personally will never use it. You would find a car trading community and sell it. Just the knowledge that someone would probably buy it from you in a currency you can use is enough. Now how many classic car repairmen are there? Surely there are more geeks in the world.
As long as certain people want this currency it is valuable. It's becoming more, not less, widely desired and accepted and even if it continued to be a geek thing that would give it a stable value.
The only way to improve food production in Africa is a good number of well placed bullets. Start with the war lords, drug dealers, diamond tycoons, and the raping and looting semi independent armies. By the time you work your way down to the every day thug, implement massive cultural change, the concept of human rights, contract enforcement, and democracy you'll be 70% there.
Then you can give them knowledge about how to produce food and expect it to work.
I'm sure they wouldn't allow a helicopter that uses air earlier compressed by the human pilot so what about stored momentum in the blades and machinery? Also do air currents count as stored energy? Obviously this couldn't fly without the ground effect... Just some thoughts.
Your comment was meant to be amusing but there is something to to think about here: Emergent behaviors from physical interaction between robots.
For example imagine an Asimo trying to drive a semi-automated car: The car's systems, built to respond to a human driver, keep cycling modifications of control outputs in a way a human driver can easily work with but Asimo keeps fighting them, causing a crash.
This kind of problem isn't terribly hard to deal with in software but the only way to deal with possible physical interaction bugs is extensive testing using two systems together.
I'm really frustrated with chattterbots using clever tricks to hold a conversation without understanding it. They can talk about many different things but it's clear the best of them can only respond to, at most, the previous sentence and one possible current topic. Here's an example from a chat I just had with Jabberwacky:
Me: Would you rather be a tuna or an elephant and why? JW: I would much rather be a bee, and make honey for my queen. Me: Okay but if 'bee' weren't one of the options. JW: What does gender mean?
This chatterbot couldn't score over 60 in a standard IQ test and it shows: When it doesn't know what to say it says something random.
Anyway the point of all of this is at least someone is looking at making a computer understand something new in conversational habits instead of looking for new clever tricks.
I applaud what they're doing and can even see this as appropriate. That said... Am I the only one getting the jitters at the thought of millions of people downloading and running a program from a department of the US government?
Cloverfield was the stinkiest pile of tripe and the most obnoxious waste of my time since two girls once cup.
The story was preposterous, the plot nonexistent, the special effects worthless, and the acting atrocious. I would have been more entertained by an hour and a half of grandma's vacation and the screenwriting would have been three times as good. Only the overwhelming sense of nausea kept me in my seat until the glorious minute it was over.
I'm confused: If it's above 100 c it's steam or under a huge amount of pressure; The cooling water has always been below that temperature. What does the fine article mean here?
TFA is full of empty speculation and even if Microsoft were trying to do this their extensive history of withholding key, drastic hardware control level features at the last minute argues against the idea they could carry it off. There will be no pan-fundatio Windows 8.0
When books were sold. Before that is was when paintings were sold and musicians were patronized. Before that it was the joker in the castle and the busker on the streets. People have always paid for culture. The only thing that's changed is the medium.
Here's the plan:
Tell pirates' friends about the piracy. Everyone realize how common piracy is and how even good people do it. Piracy loses its social stigma. Piracy doubles.
You think that "lower everyone's standard of living" is an acceptable solution to global warming. Let me tell you why you are an idiot.
Ultimately the only way a whole population will willingly lower its standard of living when it has the resources not to is a draconian rule of law. Countries living under such harsh regimes inevitably fall into economic disrepair, government corruption, and finally revolution. While you may not see a law requiring everyone to give up their car as draconian I assure you it is.
...aside from a computer's faster reflexes, direct control, and never being drunk, senile, or obnoxious:
A: You're about to be in my way!
B: Sorry, my breaks are shot. I'm going that way. (pointing)
A: Okay so I'll try to edge in behind you. Can you speed up a tad?
B: Okay I'll speed up. I don't have anyone in my back seat so you can fishtail into me on the way if you have to to get by.
A: Thanks.
C: Hey what's going on over there?
A: We're in a risky situation. You should try to avoid us. We think we'll be in these places at these times. (send chart)
C: Okay, I'm moving this way at this speed if I can. I'll keep you posted.
Taxi. Taxi. Taxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxi. You are wrong and I'm sick of hearing this severely mistaken idea. I want a car to:
--Let me choose my own cost/benefits. --Make a personal statement and stylistic preferences. --Keep more stuff than I can carry with me, including from errand to errand, from day to day, and things for emergencies that others may not think is worth the cost of hauling around. --Have immediately (not within 5 minutes) and closely (not within a block) available, almost certainly, almost all the time. --Let me be familiar with its quirks and needs so caring for it is cheaper. --Fit my individual needs whether it's low milage, the ability to haul a certain amount of gear, tow a certain sized trailer, or whatever.
I suppose you could have a fleet of taxis built to the most stringent requirements 99% of people will need, each pulling a cart of gear as needed (and kept by) the individual but the cost of that would more than outweigh the savings of having the cars as group property and it still wouldn't address individual preferences.
1 We don't know if the cooling system has completely failed (and you're accusing the power company of blatant lies)
2 We don't know if the explosion happened in the core power production (but they're saying it was a hydrogen explosion in the cooling system)
3 The same pictures would be seen if this is pressure release valves operating normally within the core unit.
Rising demand does not lead to inflation as long as production can keep up. This whole conversation is about how mechanical workers are leaving people unemployed.
Inflation does not necessarily lead to higher taxes.
Rising taxes don't necessarily lead to price controls. Where did you even get these ideas? Am I being trolled?
Slashdot Mirror
Just in case i wasn't the only one in need of a basic grammar refresher.
While these three terms are related, their meanings are subtly different. To help understand the distinction, we consulted a number of sources -- American Heritage Dictionary, the Yahoo! Grammar, Usage, and Style category, and web search results for the three terms.
The dictionary defines a "metaphor" as a figure of speech that uses one thing to mean another and makes a comparison between the two. For example, Shakespeare's line, "All the world's a stage," is a metaphor comparing the whole world to a theater stage. Metaphors can be very simple, and they can function as most any part of speech. "The spy shadowed the woman" is a verb metaphor. The spy doesn't literally cast his shadow on the woman, but he follows her so closely and quietly that he resembles her own shadow.
A simile, also called an open comparison, is a form of metaphor that compares two different things to create a new meaning. But a simile always uses "like" or "as" within the phrase and is more explicit than a metaphor. For example, Shakespeare's line could be rewritten as a simile to read: "The world is like a stage." Another simile would be: "The spy was close as a shadow." Both metaphor and simile can be used to enhance writing.
An analogy is a bit more complicated. At the most basic level, an analogy shows similarity between things that might seem different -- much like an extended metaphor or simile. But analogy isn't just a form of speech. It can be a logical argument: if two things are alike in some ways, they are alike in some other ways as well. Analogy is often used to help provide insight by comparing an unknown subject to one that is more familiar. It can also show a relationship between pairs of things. This form of analogy is often used on standardized tests in the form "A is to B as C is to D."
Serious question: It seems like it could be possible to use an infinite number of colors with interpolated laster on pulse modulation to transmit an infinite amount of information. Why won't this work?
It makes me sad that you were modded interesting. Your argument is shortsighted blather with a whiff of ad hominem.
We all know what space is (huge, mostly empty, dangerous) but only you fail to acknowledge what it isn't. (an unsurmountable obstacle) People like you tried to stopped people from flying. The fact that technology isn't advanced enough to conquer space* without unacceptable sacrifice proves nothing about tomorrow.
*Yes I said "conquer space". There are tremendous resources to be exploited and a universe of possibilities and I'm sorry you're too stuck in your pessimism to see that.
The issue would be one of power. Law of conservation of energy and all that. Any people living on such a rock need energy to move around talk, and go about their daily lives. That energy has to come from somewhere. In our own cases, that's easy: 99% of the energy we use traces back to the sun in some way or another (geothermal is about the only naturally harnessable source that isn't solar - nuclear fission is available to societies that behave well, or already have The Bomb).
So in the end, such a rock would be useless as a vessel unless it had a very active internal heating source, plenty of nuclear material, or hydrogen where the using society had hydrogen fusion technology. Even with that, I'd wager it'd be mighty hard to support a population of any size for too long.
There, I fixed it for you.
There, I fixed that "I fixed it for you" for you.
A small and widely dispersed group of people in a population valuing something is enough to make it valuable. If enough geeks value it (will give wealth to get the currency) that's enough. Let me give you an example: you probably have little use for an unused transmission from a 1949 Jaguar XK120. Only a guy working with classic cars would want it.
But if you had such an item you wouldn't give it away would you? Even though you personally will never use it. You would find a car trading community and sell it. Just the knowledge that someone would probably buy it from you in a currency you can use is enough. Now how many classic car repairmen are there? Surely there are more geeks in the world.
As long as certain people want this currency it is valuable. It's becoming more, not less, widely desired and accepted and even if it continued to be a geek thing that would give it a stable value.
The only way to improve food production in Africa is a good number of well placed bullets. Start with the war lords, drug dealers, diamond tycoons, and the raping and looting semi independent armies. By the time you work your way down to the every day thug, implement massive cultural change, the concept of human rights, contract enforcement, and democracy you'll be 70% there.
Then you can give them knowledge about how to produce food and expect it to work.
I'm sure they wouldn't allow a helicopter that uses air earlier compressed by the human pilot so what about stored momentum in the blades and machinery? Also do air currents count as stored energy? Obviously this couldn't fly without the ground effect... Just some thoughts.
Your comment was meant to be amusing but there is something to to think about here: Emergent behaviors from physical interaction between robots. For example imagine an Asimo trying to drive a semi-automated car: The car's systems, built to respond to a human driver, keep cycling modifications of control outputs in a way a human driver can easily work with but Asimo keeps fighting them, causing a crash. This kind of problem isn't terribly hard to deal with in software but the only way to deal with possible physical interaction bugs is extensive testing using two systems together.
Victimless crimes should NOT be crimes. FTFY
I'm really frustrated with chattterbots using clever tricks to hold a conversation without understanding it. They can talk about many different things but it's clear the best of them can only respond to, at most, the previous sentence and one possible current topic. Here's an example from a chat I just had with Jabberwacky:
Me: Would you rather be a tuna or an elephant and why?
JW: I would much rather be a bee, and make honey for my queen.
Me: Okay but if 'bee' weren't one of the options.
JW: What does gender mean?
This chatterbot couldn't score over 60 in a standard IQ test and it shows: When it doesn't know what to say it says something random.
Anyway the point of all of this is at least someone is looking at making a computer understand something new in conversational habits instead of looking for new clever tricks.
I applaud what they're doing and can even see this as appropriate. That said... Am I the only one getting the jitters at the thought of millions of people downloading and running a program from a department of the US government?
Ask and ye shall receive
Cloverfield was the stinkiest pile of tripe and the most obnoxious waste of my time since two girls once cup. The story was preposterous, the plot nonexistent, the special effects worthless, and the acting atrocious. I would have been more entertained by an hour and a half of grandma's vacation and the screenwriting would have been three times as good. Only the overwhelming sense of nausea kept me in my seat until the glorious minute it was over.
I'm confused: If it's above 100 c it's steam or under a huge amount of pressure; The cooling water has always been below that temperature. What does the fine article mean here?
TFA is full of empty speculation and even if Microsoft were trying to do this their extensive history of withholding key, drastic hardware control level features at the last minute argues against the idea they could carry it off. There will be no pan-fundatio Windows 8.0
When books were sold. Before that is was when paintings were sold and musicians were patronized. Before that it was the joker in the castle and the busker on the streets. People have always paid for culture. The only thing that's changed is the medium.
Here's the plan: Tell pirates' friends about the piracy. Everyone realize how common piracy is and how even good people do it. Piracy loses its social stigma. Piracy doubles.
You think that "lower everyone's standard of living" is an acceptable solution to global warming. Let me tell you why you are an idiot.
Ultimately the only way a whole population will willingly lower its standard of living when it has the resources not to is a draconian rule of law. Countries living under such harsh regimes inevitably fall into economic disrepair, government corruption, and finally revolution. While you may not see a law requiring everyone to give up their car as draconian I assure you it is.
...aside from a computer's faster reflexes, direct control, and never being drunk, senile, or obnoxious:
A: You're about to be in my way!
B: Sorry, my breaks are shot. I'm going that way. (pointing)
A: Okay so I'll try to edge in behind you. Can you speed up a tad?
B: Okay I'll speed up. I don't have anyone in my back seat so you can fishtail into me on the way if you have to to get by.
A: Thanks.
C: Hey what's going on over there?
A: We're in a risky situation. You should try to avoid us. We think we'll be in these places at these times. (send chart)
C: Okay, I'm moving this way at this speed if I can. I'll keep you posted.
I am intrigued by your ideas and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Taxi. Taxi. Taxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxitaxi. You are wrong and I'm sick of hearing this severely mistaken idea. I want a car to:
--Let me choose my own cost/benefits.
--Make a personal statement and stylistic preferences.
--Keep more stuff than I can carry with me, including from errand to errand, from day to day, and things for emergencies that others may not think is worth the cost of hauling around.
--Have immediately (not within 5 minutes) and closely (not within a block) available, almost certainly, almost all the time.
--Let me be familiar with its quirks and needs so caring for it is cheaper.
--Fit my individual needs whether it's low milage, the ability to haul a certain amount of gear, tow a certain sized trailer, or whatever.
I suppose you could have a fleet of taxis built to the most stringent requirements 99% of people will need, each pulling a cart of gear as needed (and kept by) the individual but the cost of that would more than outweigh the savings of having the cars as group property and it still wouldn't address individual preferences.
How the hell is this off-topic in a conversation about the perceived safety of nuclear power?
and modded informative.
1 We don't know if the cooling system has completely failed (and you're accusing the power company of blatant lies)
2 We don't know if the explosion happened in the core power production (but they're saying it was a hydrogen explosion in the cooling system)
3 The same pictures would be seen if this is pressure release valves operating normally within the core unit.
each link in your chain of logic is flawed.
Rising demand does not lead to inflation as long as production can keep up. This whole conversation is about how mechanical workers are leaving people unemployed.
Inflation does not necessarily lead to higher taxes.
Rising taxes don't necessarily lead to price controls. Where did you even get these ideas? Am I being trolled?
chamber filled with debris>no chamber at all