Language is understood by consensus - meanings are implicitly agreed upon by whatever group is using it at any one time. It constantly changes, and equally that means changes can be redirected and resisted.
Agreed, but you've already lost the battle for "unique" in the same way many people here are still fighting the battle "hacker" vs "cracker" battle. The battle is over, there is consensus. Get over it.
Language evolution isn't done by committee. It's not a case of people agreeing or disagreeing with a new usage of a word. The moment people are using it, and you understood what they meant by it, the battle is over. You can't undo a definition by correcting people. Words lose a particular definition only one said definition is forgotten for lack of use. And if anything, I think it's more likely that the word "unique" will lose the "only one in existence" definition before it loses the "unusual" definition. So if you want to be clear that something is unique in the sense that there is only one of whatever it is, say that there's only one of it, and don't use the word unique.
Sooooo...by the above, would it be incorrect to state that a person's fingerprints or DNA (except in the case of identical sibling(s), and even that is subject to debate on the DNA) are unique?
They develop technologies, they prototype it, they "own the rights to it"; IE: the Intellectual Property, not that they necessarily physically manufacture products. They seem to make the BULK of their money by suing other companies once these other companies have proven the commercial viability of technology that RAMBUS was only peripherally involved in developing, at the same time as many other firms, and somehow managed to get one (or more patents) filed on (which a gut feeling tells me has some back-dating involved - absolutely no concrete evidence here).
To the best of MY knowledge, the closest the came to actually producing and marketing an actual, physical product is/was the short-lived, abortive RDRAM used solely by Intel at one point; and we all know how THAT went when no one else would play ball with that idea...it withered and died on the vine. I could well be waaaay off-base on this. As I say, this is strictly to the best of MY knowledge.
Do I HAVE to think of EVERYTHING? You use a Panasonic Toughbook....the militarized, ruggedized laptop that stands up to just about all the abuse you can throw at it. A little condensation won't bother it.
Why do you have a laptop if you don't take it with you? Quite. Easy solution : don't use a laptop, find a DEC PDP 10 on eBay. Nobody will steal that. And if somebody somehow does, you'll notice immediately when it's disconnected by the way the whole city block's lights suddenly brighten.
And....you'll learn how we used to compute back in the prehistoric times with bearskins and stone knives when I first started out with these things almost 40 years ago. It'll be good for you...builds character and gives a sense of perspective.
"UC not only ran the Manhattan Project start to finish, it also ran the Los Alamos and Livermore laboratories..."
Let me tell you, as a former LLNL employee, that place could be a genuine NIGHTMARE to work at. Never in my career had I encountered so many adult infants concentrated so heavily in one place at one time. They had absolutely no idea of what it is like to try to work to a deadline, much less within budget constraints - perish the thought of trying to come in UNDER budget. It is a wonder that anything of any value ever exited there in a timely fashion.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed, but you've already lost the battle for "unique" in the same way many people here are still fighting the battle "hacker" vs "cracker" battle. The battle is over, there is consensus. Get over it.
Language evolution isn't done by committee. It's not a case of people agreeing or disagreeing with a new usage of a word. The moment people are using it, and you understood what they meant by it, the battle is over. You can't undo a definition by correcting people. Words lose a particular definition only one said definition is forgotten for lack of use. And if anything, I think it's more likely that the word "unique" will lose the "only one in existence" definition before it loses the "unusual" definition. So if you want to be clear that something is unique in the sense that there is only one of whatever it is, say that there's only one of it, and don't use the word unique.
Sooooo...by the above, would it be incorrect to state that a person's fingerprints or DNA (except in the case of identical sibling(s), and even that is subject to debate on the DNA) are unique?They develop technologies, they prototype it, they "own the rights to it"; IE: the Intellectual Property, not that they necessarily physically manufacture products. They seem to make the BULK of their money by suing other companies once these other companies have proven the commercial viability of technology that RAMBUS was only peripherally involved in developing, at the same time as many other firms, and somehow managed to get one (or more patents) filed on (which a gut feeling tells me has some back-dating involved - absolutely no concrete evidence here). To the best of MY knowledge, the closest the came to actually producing and marketing an actual, physical product is/was the short-lived, abortive RDRAM used solely by Intel at one point; and we all know how THAT went when no one else would play ball with that idea...it withered and died on the vine. I could well be waaaay off-base on this. As I say, this is strictly to the best of MY knowledge.
Do I HAVE to think of EVERYTHING? You use a Panasonic Toughbook....the militarized, ruggedized laptop that stands up to just about all the abuse you can throw at it. A little condensation won't bother it.
I don't think the OP is paranoid. Someone really IS following them!
And....you'll learn how we used to compute back in the prehistoric times with bearskins and stone knives when I first started out with these things almost 40 years ago. It'll be good for you...builds character and gives a sense of perspective.
Anyone whose lunch breaks have gone "from the usual two hour" to three is in need of serious termination with EXTREME prejudice. But that's just me.
Stanley Kubrick and Dr. Strangelove, anyone?
"UC not only ran the Manhattan Project start to finish, it also ran the Los Alamos and Livermore laboratories..." Let me tell you, as a former LLNL employee, that place could be a genuine NIGHTMARE to work at. Never in my career had I encountered so many adult infants concentrated so heavily in one place at one time. They had absolutely no idea of what it is like to try to work to a deadline, much less within budget constraints - perish the thought of trying to come in UNDER budget. It is a wonder that anything of any value ever exited there in a timely fashion.