I must live in a vacuum. I'd honestly never heard of Steve Irwin before today. Seems he must have bypassed France altogether. Mind you, a lot of things bypass France altogether.
Leaving all economic considerations apart, I would never buy LED illumination because I simply HATE the sickly, ghostly light it gives out. It's OK as a cell phone gimmick or for flashlights where all you want to do is provide temporary lighting for whatever reason, but imagine living with that kind of light in your main room, or working for hours a day under that kind of lighting. No thank you!
I don't know what your definition of "games of old is". The most enjoyable and involved adventure game I ever played, and the one that had the best storyline by a long, long way, was The Beast Within in the Gabriel Knight series.
Without the photo-realism, video cuts, and voice clips it just wouldn't have worked as well. The next in the series was in 3-D animation and just couldn't capture the same mood. Now absolutely everything is in 3-D animation.
So for me the golden age is past but it's not 20-25 years ago, more like 10.
Judging from the number of people who ask me about it (I'm a Briton in France), I'd say an impossible rather than a surprisingly hard idea to grasp.
You see here they have a past composite tense which has exactly the same construct as English's present perfect, hence their confusion. Once I tell them it's a present tense in English and not a past tense they begin to have some sort of understanding — but just as much difficulty!
Maybe you could solve the problem by performing a second ranking of results according to the number of "deliberate" votes a candidate receives, whether these be positive or negative votes. Then you could do something like eliminate the bottom quartile or tercile for not having enough mindshare to count in the result.
In the unmodified system, candidate d) would win with a net +25 even though only one voter in 12 paid him any attention; candidate g) would finish ahead of candidate b) even though not one single voter gave a damn about her.
But if you apply a bottom quartile rule (535/4 = 134), candidates d), e), f), and g) are eliminated due to lack of interest and candidate b) wins with a net +20.
Having said that, it all seems a bit airy-fairy to me.
You can bet your life that somewhere out there there's a previously undiscovered body measuring 2,999km just waiting for the day your definition gets official acceptance.
So what phrase would you suggest we use to make sure people understand what we're talking about when we mean "begging the question" in the logical sense?
Come on now, you've stolen the original meaning so give us something in return.
As for your argument about creating a different nuance from "raising the question" - give it a rest. You're inventing nuances to justify your argument. Do you really think people stop to ask themselves if "raises the question" is strong enough to convey their true feelings before setting pen to paper?
Tell me about it. I've been cycling back through Winamp versions for the last few weeks now after installing the most recent version and having it crash every ten or so songs. The problem is I can't remember the number of the version I used to have that worked exactly the way it should.
All I can say is hats off to oldversion. Thanks to them I CAN cycle back.
Just to clarify a point, I need Winamp. I won't say why but you can take it from me it is indispensable.
"Elections in India are events involving political mobilisation and organisational complexity on an amazing scale. In the 1996 election to Lok Sabha there were 1,269 candidates from 38 officially recognised national and state parties seeking election, 1,048 candidates from registered parties, not recognised and 10,635 independent candidates. A total number of 592,572,288 people voted. The Election Commission employed almost 4,000,000 people to run the election. A vast number of civilian police and security forces were deployed to ensure that the elections were carried out peacefully. The direct cost of organising the election amounted to approximately Rs. 5,180 million.
"Voting is by secret ballot. Polling stations are usually set up in public institutions, such as schools and community halls. To enable as many electors as possible to vote, the officials of the Election Commission try to ensure that there is a polling station within 2km of every voter, and that no polling stations should have to deal with more than 1200 voters. Each polling station is open for at least 8 hours on the day of the election.
"On entering the polling station, the elector is checked against the Electoral Roll, and allocated a ballot paper. The elector votes by marking the ballot paper with a rubber stamp on or near the symbol of the candidate of his choice, inside a screened compartment in the polling station. The voter then folds the ballot paper and inserts it in a common ballot box which is kept in full view of the Presiding Officer and polling agents of the candidates. This marking system eliminates the possibility of ballot papers being surreptitiously taken out of the polling station or not being put in the ballot box."
1) It seems to me we're discussing semantics, not arguing: all the GP did was ask a simple question about his friend's professor. He was interested enough to ask for opinions and I was interested enough to give mine.
2) No everything doesn't have to be X vs not X any more.I'd have thought my very own "Little-known and lesser-known exist purely as shorthand ways of saying how many people have the knowledge in question" was proof of that.
"Known" as an adjective is absolute, like pregnant. There are only two states: known and unknown. Little-known and lesser-known exist purely as shorthand ways of saying how many people have the knowledge in question. They're quirks of the language, as illustrated by their opposites "well-known" and "better-known" rather than "great-known" and "greater-known" (or even "much-known" and "more-known").
I'm just trying to imagine the reaction if I called someone a lesser-pregnant girl;)
For all those who say play with the kids for three minutes...
Why?
Why should the DVD makers decide when you play with the kids? You might have already been playing with them for hours when they ask you if they can watch a film.
The DVD makers are hindering your ability to use your time as you see fit. Period. It doesn't matter whether it's two minutes or two hours: it's your time and it's up to you alone to judge what is or what isn't too long.
The big issue in the thumbnail half of the case is that some thumbnails correspond exactly to images available (for a fee) for download onto mobile phones. Which I think is a fair point.
To keep everybody happy then, not just perfect 10, wouldn't it be a simple matter for Google just to spoil thumbnails by overprinting them with (for example) "subject to copyright"?
That way you still get do a meaningful search via the thumbnails but you don't get a high quality pic.
Wouldn't that be a reasonable, sensible solution for everyone concerned?
I don't know why I'm allowing myself to be dragged into this but...
I know the article is in English but just as a matter of interest, in French there is no notion of proper adjectives, only proper nouns. So "French" translates as "français", but "a Frenchman" translates as "un Français". Other words like days of the week and names of months also remain uncapitalised.
Even in English, when a proper adjective-noun pairing becomes commonplace, it loses its capital, thus "french letter", "parmesan cheese", etc.
Listen, I can be a grammar nazi along with the best of them but capitalising proper terms is the last of my worries unless I really can't tell whether someone's talking about Polish vodka or floor polish.
I beg to differ. For me the real issue is someone trying to cheat. And Google apparently does have a system to fix that, as they've just shown.
Now tell me, Why would such a system necessarily have to be built into the software? More to the point, what would a software based system actually do? not show the page? But that's what they just did manually, isn't it?
I happen to do a lot of translation work for a French agency that raises funds to finance organisations that combat child abuse. They do so by establishing full-blown infrastructures to attack the reasons why kids are vulnerable in the first place, as well as setting up rehabilitation programmes for rescued kids who are traumatised for life. Their grant applications, notably to the European Union, go into all the sordid details about trafficking in children. In Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh, tens of thousands of children every year are abducted into one form of slavery or another. There is a cross border traffic in both directions, with for example lots of Afghan refugee children undergoing similar ignomy. The camel jockeys are a particularly bad example because the kids are deliberately starved.
If Kuwait is going to fall into line that's good news, but it's really only the tip iceberg. For a start it's not the biggest market for these kids - the United Arab Emirates is huge in comparison. And the traffic in camel jockeys is just a small part of the overall children's rights problem. If I told you about some of the other sordid things that kids have to undergo believe me it would make your skin crawl.
Slashdot Mirror
I must live in a vacuum. I'd honestly never heard of Steve Irwin before today.
Seems he must have bypassed France altogether.
Mind you, a lot of things bypass France altogether.
Leaving all economic considerations apart, I would never buy LED illumination because I simply HATE the sickly, ghostly light it gives out. It's OK as a cell phone gimmick or for flashlights where all you want to do is provide temporary lighting for whatever reason, but imagine living with that kind of light in your main room, or working for hours a day under that kind of lighting. No thank you!
Maybe the Mozilla team could spring a counter trap:
/ 1-1.jpg?path=gallery&path_key=0116996
http://www.imdb.com/gallery/ss/0116996/Ss/0116996
When do these 12 principles take effect?
Surely they're not implying they're already in operation.
How much at risk are you of losing something important in your life if you don't visit?
I don't know what your definition of "games of old is". The most enjoyable and involved adventure game I ever played, and the one that had the best storyline by a long, long way, was The Beast Within in the Gabriel Knight series.
k R/gk2R.htm
http://www.mrbillsadventureland.com/reviews/g-h/g
Without the photo-realism, video cuts, and voice clips it just wouldn't have worked as well.
The next in the series was in 3-D animation and just couldn't capture the same mood.
Now absolutely everything is in 3-D animation.
So for me the golden age is past but it's not 20-25 years ago, more like 10.
Judging from the number of people who ask me about it (I'm a Briton in France), I'd say an impossible rather than a surprisingly hard idea to grasp.
You see here they have a past composite tense which has exactly the same construct as English's present perfect, hence their confusion.
Once I tell them it's a present tense in English and not a past tense they begin to have some sort of understanding — but just as much difficulty!
Is there a quick and easy way to block all e-mail transiting via a Taiwan server?
It's not as though I know (or envisage knowing) anybody in Taiwan.
To help end this war I suggest we drop both phrases and start using "I don't fucking care".
No, on second thoughts forget it. Before you know, people will start saying "I fucking care" when they mean they don't.
When it comes down to it I'm fucked if anybody cares.
"Digital Rights Management" is a euphemistic name contrived by the media industries. Any labelling requirements sould not buy into this trap.
"WARNING: RESTRICTED USE" as a compulsory warning is much clearer.
Or even better might be a counter-offensive "DIGITALLY RESTRICTED MEDIA" * to help people see through **AA propaganda.
* yes I know "MEDIUM" is the singular of media but do consumers?
That's a very interesting and valid observation.
Maybe you could solve the problem by performing a second ranking of results according to the number of "deliberate" votes a candidate receives, whether these be positive or negative votes.
Then you could do something like eliminate the bottom quartile or tercile for not having enough mindshare to count in the result.
e.g.,
candidate a) 95+ 95- (total 190 votes)
candidate b) 95+ 75- (170)
candidate c) 40+ 60- (100)
candidate d) 35+ 10- (45)
candidate e) 10+ 5- (15)
candidate f) 3+ 12- (15)
candidate g) 0+ 0- (0)
total votes: 535
In the unmodified system, candidate d) would win with a net +25 even though only one voter in 12 paid him any attention; candidate g) would finish ahead of candidate b) even though not one single voter gave a damn about her.
But if you apply a bottom quartile rule (535/4 = 134), candidates d), e), f), and g) are eliminated due to lack of interest and candidate b) wins with a net +20.
Having said that, it all seems a bit airy-fairy to me.
You can bet your life that somewhere out there there's a previously undiscovered body measuring 2,999km just waiting for the day your definition gets official acceptance.
So what phrase would you suggest we use to make sure people understand what we're talking about when we mean "begging the question" in the logical sense?
Come on now, you've stolen the original meaning so give us something in return.
As for your argument about creating a different nuance from "raising the question" - give it a rest. You're inventing nuances to justify your argument. Do you really think people stop to ask themselves if "raises the question" is strong enough to convey their true feelings before setting pen to paper?
...because Wine has *never* been an acronym for "Wine Is Not (an) Emulator".
It does in fact stand for WINdows Emulator.
Or at least until as recently as July 2003 it did...
"Wine (the Un*x Windows emulator)"
http://www.winehq.org/?issue=160
The "debunking myths" guy got it wrong. Let him consider himself debunked!
Tell me about it. I've been cycling back through Winamp versions for the last few weeks now after installing the most recent version and having it crash every ten or so songs. The problem is I can't remember the number of the version I used to have that worked exactly the way it should.
All I can say is hats off to oldversion. Thanks to them I CAN cycle back.
Just to clarify a point, I need Winamp. I won't say why but you can take it from me it is indispensable.
AKA the world's biggest democracy...
"Elections in India are events involving political mobilisation and organisational complexity on an amazing scale. In the 1996 election to Lok Sabha there were 1,269 candidates from 38 officially recognised national and state parties seeking election, 1,048 candidates from registered parties, not recognised and 10,635 independent candidates. A total number of 592,572,288 people voted. The Election Commission employed almost 4,000,000 people to run the election. A vast number of civilian police and security forces were deployed to ensure that the elections were carried out peacefully. The direct cost of organising the election amounted to approximately Rs. 5,180 million.
"Voting is by secret ballot. Polling stations are usually set up in public institutions, such as schools and community halls. To enable as many electors as possible to vote, the officials of the Election Commission try to ensure that there is a polling station within 2km of every voter, and that no polling stations should have to deal with more than 1200 voters. Each polling station is open for at least 8 hours on the day of the election.
"On entering the polling station, the elector is checked against the Electoral Roll, and allocated a ballot paper. The elector votes by marking the ballot paper with a rubber stamp on or near the symbol of the candidate of his choice, inside a screened compartment in the polling station. The voter then folds the ballot paper and inserts it in a common ballot box which is kept in full view of the Presiding Officer and polling agents of the candidates. This marking system eliminates the possibility of ballot papers being surreptitiously taken out of the polling station or not being put in the ballot box."
Well, since you asked...
1) It seems to me we're discussing semantics, not arguing: all the GP did was ask a simple question about his friend's professor.
He was interested enough to ask for opinions and I was interested enough to give mine.
2) No everything doesn't have to be X vs not X any more.I'd have thought my very own "Little-known and lesser-known exist purely as shorthand ways of saying how many people have the knowledge in question" was proof of that.
"Known" as an adjective is absolute, like pregnant. There are only two states: known and unknown.
;)
Little-known and lesser-known exist purely as shorthand ways of saying how many people have the knowledge in question. They're quirks of the language, as illustrated by their opposites "well-known" and "better-known" rather than "great-known" and "greater-known" (or even "much-known" and "more-known").
I'm just trying to imagine the reaction if I called someone a lesser-pregnant girl
For all those who say play with the kids for three minutes...
Why?
Why should the DVD makers decide when you play with the kids?
You might have already been playing with them for hours when they ask you if they can watch a film.
The DVD makers are hindering your ability to use your time as you see fit. Period. It doesn't matter whether it's two minutes or two hours: it's your time and it's up to you alone to judge what is or what isn't too long.
The big issue in the thumbnail half of the case is that some thumbnails correspond exactly to images available (for a fee) for download onto mobile phones. Which I think is a fair point.
To keep everybody happy then, not just perfect 10, wouldn't it be a simple matter for Google just to spoil thumbnails by overprinting them with (for example) "subject to copyright"?
That way you still get do a meaningful search via the thumbnails but you don't get a high quality pic.
Wouldn't that be a reasonable, sensible solution for everyone concerned?
I dunno about Page and Brin but I find Schmidt looks uncomfortably like Bill Gates on those photos - big glasses, bad hair, and more ...
I don't know why I'm allowing myself to be dragged into this but...
I know the article is in English but just as a matter of interest, in French there is no notion of proper adjectives, only proper nouns. So "French" translates as "français", but "a Frenchman" translates as "un Français". Other words like days of the week and names of months also remain uncapitalised.
Even in English, when a proper adjective-noun pairing becomes commonplace, it loses its capital, thus "french letter", "parmesan cheese", etc.
Listen, I can be a grammar nazi along with the best of them but capitalising proper terms is the last of my worries unless I really can't tell whether someone's talking about Polish vodka or floor polish.
Ooh yes lemme bite lemme bite lemme bite!
1) We don't speak English on Slashdot, we write it.
2) In the US of A proper nouns like Churchill and Endinburgh are written thus.
I beg to differ. For me the real issue is someone trying to cheat. And Google apparently does have a system to fix that, as they've just shown.
Now tell me, Why would such a system necessarily have to be built into the software? More to the point, what would a software based system actually do? not show the page?
But that's what they just did manually, isn't it?
I happen to do a lot of translation work for a French agency that raises funds to finance organisations that combat child abuse. They do so by establishing full-blown infrastructures to attack the reasons why kids are vulnerable in the first place, as well as setting up rehabilitation programmes for rescued kids who are traumatised for life.
Their grant applications, notably to the European Union, go into all the sordid details about trafficking in children. In Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh, tens of thousands of children every year are abducted into one form of slavery or another. There is a cross border traffic in both directions, with for example lots of Afghan refugee children undergoing similar ignomy. The camel jockeys are a particularly bad example because the kids are deliberately starved.
If Kuwait is going to fall into line that's good news, but it's really only the tip iceberg. For a start it's not the biggest market for these kids - the United Arab Emirates is huge in comparison.
And the traffic in camel jockeys is just a small part of the overall children's rights problem. If I told you about some of the other sordid things that kids have to undergo believe me it would make your skin crawl.
It's absolutley no laughing matter.