While having Mugabe in charge would be damn scary, having Bush at the controls of the resources of a nation like the US isn't particularly reassuring either. I'll agree having Mugabe in charge of the US would be enough to make me start building that underground bunker though.
Good grammer is only helpful to get a message across.
And what, if not that, are you attempting to do when you express your opinion?
BTW:
You mean the people don't like to be criticized. [question mark required]
As someone who is constantly picked on by these people, I can say that more than often, [unnecessary comma] they are rude, and [required] have very little to add to any discussion, other than showing off their impressive command of the English language. I'd be more receptive to this criticism [add this] if some of them made their response to the thread at hand, [unnecessary comma] and did [incorrect verb: "and ended with" works] a BTW, but that's not what happens. Usually they are just have [unnecessary] one line responses [needs the 's' to accord with 'they'] that is [are] rude, and [unnecessary] often picking [just 'pick'] on one or two 'mistakes' [quotes unnecessary;)], and are [required]always [hyperbole: use 'usually' or 'almost always'] critical of one's intelligence. [new paragraph] I've said it before, but it's not the diction, but the message [moved this from the end of the sentence] that matters. Good grammer [sic] is only helpful to get a message across. I'm not writing a fucking paper, it's an [you mean 'a'] response in a damn forum.
Am I missing something here?
Yes, good humor, understanding, and basic people skills.
Or make him a slashdot editor and he can post his own damn stuff; then we can filter him like JonKatz. But honestly, if I wanted to read his plagiarised crap, I'd read his site, not slashdot.
Aside from giving readers the ability to filter his crap, I can think of several legitimate uses for a Roland section:
1. A new section icon. Let me be the first to propose the Goatse man. As a beneficial side-effect, this would help encourage new readers to make the "correct" filtering decision. 2. For that matter, stories in the Roland section could have special ads targeted at masochists and the mentally deficient. 3. When trolls are identified, they could lose access to all stories *except* Roland stories.
Honestly - I see *no* downside whatsoever here. This is win-win for everyone.
No I think you're right on there. From my understanding of it, most blind users are using screen readers to navigate the web, so enhancing whatever software it is that generates the images to also produce a sound file would probably suffice.
I'm not entierly sure how many blind *and* deaf users there are browsing the web unassisted, but I suppose a broader solution would depend on what technology they're using to browse the web. Some form of braille reader, perhaps? If anyone knows the answer to this, I'd be very curious to know.
If that were the case, I suppose a more universal, text based solution would be required -- this makes more sense to me anyway. Plus, Lynx users can be happy:)
you can spend 3 seconds typing in the word "uNFsaQ" to prove you're human.
Unless you happen to be a blind blogger. With all the effort people have put into accessibility there's got to be a validation method that can work for the blind as well.
Just mentioning this because I've seen this complaint several times by blind users on slashdot.
Dear Rahga, You've been around here long enough that you should know no matter how many times you try to convince people, it's a lost cause. And while I've been around long enough to know the difference, I have to admit, 'cracking' just sounds retarded. Sorry. Why not call it criminal computing or criminal hacking or something? Whether anyone likes it or not, that meaning of 'hacking' is here to stay.
It's the difference between prescriptive vs. descriptive points of view on language I guess.
With the introduction of DMCA legislation in Canada yesterday
Not to go too far off topic, but keep in mind that this bill has been introduced and is not yet law; as such anyone, particularly Canadian citizens, who cares about this should stop by their MP's office, write them (preferrably on paper), or phone them and voice their opinion on this legislation.
If you check out this article by Michael Geist, you can see the various parties' stances on copyright reform.
Summary: Liberal - Middle of the road. Basically For. NDP - For BQ - For Conservatives - Against Green - Against
Very surprised particularly at the NDP and Conservatives stance. I voted Green last time in any case.
The full text of the Toronto Star article linked from the link above to avoid registration:
Parties the same? Not on tech issues Surprising answers emerge from surveys
With much at stake, there's little debate
MICHAEL GEIST LAW BYTES
With the federal election now just one week away, millions of voters are sizing up the national parties' positions on a wide range of issues. For those interested in technology law and policy issues -- including copyright, spam, and privacy -- the election campaign has been a disappointment as technology policy has barely registered on the election-issue radar.
While it may be understandable for technology policy to take a back seat to health care, national defence, and tax policy, an election campaign would be an ideal time to generate discussion and learn about positions on issues that typically stir debate throughout the year.
In recent weeks several groups have tried to capture the attention of the national parties and local candidates by posing questions on technology law policy and posting the responses online. The Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) at the University of Ottawa, online at http://www.cippic.ca/ distributed a questionnaire to each national party covering key copyright policies issues including positions on music file sharing and Internet service provider liability as well as on spam, the use of open source software, and national ID cards (in the interests of full disclosure it should be noted that I am a faculty adviser to CIPPIC).
Similarly, Digital-Copyright Canada, a user and creator group, posed similar copyright questions (http://www.digital-copyright.ca/ to each local candidate across the country, while the Canadian Teachers' Federation asked each party for their views on copyright issues of concern to the education community.
With responses in hand from four of the five major political parties, different visions of Canadian technology law policy have begun to emerge.
The Liberal party sits squarely in the middle on these issues. Although the party's response speaks predominantly in generalities on copyright matters, it is revealing as much for what it says as what it does not.
First, the party pointed to the controversial blank-media levy as evidence it has worked to ensure Canada's copyright policy is modern and progressive, a surprising illustration given the opposition to the levy from a broad range of stakeholders.
Second, while the party noted the ongoing copyright reform process, it tellingly made no mention of the recent Canadian Heritage committee copyright report, perhaps seeking to distance itself from the report's recommendations. The committee, chaired by Toronto-area Liberal MP Sarmite Bulte, has drawn the ire of educators, Internet service providers, and copyright experts for adopting a one-sided perspective that fails to account for the interests of all copyright stakeholders.
Ms. Bulte herself offered a spirited endorsement of her committee's recommendations just days before the election call, concluding that the exceptions proposed by groups such as the Canadian education community to facilitate the use of the Internet within our schools was the wrong approach, characterizing such exceptions as leading to "freebies." Given the Liberal emphasis on education, its move away from Ms. Bulte's position may foreshadow a reconsideration of the recommendations should it form the new government.
Nice... let's take the attitudes of a smallish fraction of a cultural group and make sweeping generalizations about all "westerners". For someone who's attempting to make fun of people who're entrenched in their cultural beliefs, you could stand to shed a bit of bias yourself.
Not an American myself, but I'd suspect that you're exactly the kind of person who should be going back to the US to stand up for what you believe in and help turn the current political climate around.
Again: they don't seem to be disputing the claim that they have been drinking
Drinking and driving isn't a crime. Drinking until you're intoxicated, then driving is a crime. Don't know about US law, but I do know that in Canada, if you admit to the crime that's it, you proceed to sentencing no matter what you'd like to argue. In Canada you could also submit a "no contest" and accept the charges without necessarily admitting guilt, though you'll still be sentenced. They'd have to dispute the fact that they were driving drunk to result in a not guilty.
Just a guess, but Canada has a bit more forest than Australia, yet ratified the Kyoto protocol. We also have a ton of forest fires. on the order of 25 000 square km burn per year.
That said, I will still argue for hours on end that Australia is one of the best countries on the planet in my eyes.
For the record, while I think Canada's also a pretty damn fine country, I now live in Japan where I flush my ultra-efficient Japanese toilet every day.
There's no "better" / "worse"; they either are abiding by the terms of the licence, or they're not. No matter what you'd like them to be doing above and beyond the terms of the licence, the fact is, they are abiding by its terms. If the Konquerer team wanted more than that, they should have selected a licence that specified as much.
If they're not meeting the terms of the licence, I would suggest you point out precisely which clauses they aren't abiding by here (where it's likely to get a lot of free publicity), to the Safari team (who can do something about it), to the KDE team (who I would hope would go after Apple with all they have, or refer their case to the FSF), and to Apple Legal (who are responsible for remedying the situation if the Safari team won't).
Seriously; if they're not meeting any of the terms, either point out which ones, or quit your complaining. If it's that you'd rather they do more than they're obliged to under the terms of the licence, then start complaining to the KDE team that they should have used a more restrictive licence, but don't complain that someone isn't going above and beyond what they're required to.
Glad I'm not the only one:) There've been a few clever mods that have made me laugh harder than a fantastically clever comment.
Sadly, it usually inspires a slew of "Man, the mods must be on crack." and "Holy crap are the mods ever stupid." comments from users who missed the joke entirely.
Yeah, and they should be sending out roses and chocolates while they're at it.
They're complying with the terms of the licence and they're putting as much or more development into webcore than the khtml guys can manage to backport into khtml. The KDE team should be happy they've got someone giving them publicity and putting development into their project whether they can backport it or not. In cases where the code is OS X specific, they can read it and use the logic.
The Safari team should focus on webcore, which is what Apple's shareholders want them to do. They shouldn't be working part-time on backporting to another, non-Apple project.
Except for proving that they didn't by being more open they closed the door to UN inspectors.
'Cause we all no that if you're not 100% transparent you're guilty. By that logic, I hope you don't use encryption, and don't mind the government opening your mail.
As for UN inspectors, we all know exactly how much the US believes in working with the UN. You can't have it both ways.
As for liberals, I would suggest that you be a little less liberal yourself when it comes to the innovative use of hitherto unknown English spelling and grammar. In particular, I apologise if I completely misunderstood the quoted sentence, but I think I did.
Slashdot Mirror
While having Mugabe in charge would be damn scary, having Bush at the controls of the resources of a nation like the US isn't particularly reassuring either. I'll agree having Mugabe in charge of the US would be enough to make me start building that underground bunker though.
yes ;)
Learning the basics of a foreign language are one thing that I would say is valuable.
Though one should, of course, consider learning the basics of one's own language first.
Good grammer is only helpful to get a message across.
;)], and are [required] always [hyperbole: use 'usually' or 'almost always'] critical of one's intelligence. [new paragraph] I've said it before, but it's not the diction, but the message [moved this from the end of the sentence] that matters. Good grammer [sic] is only helpful to get a message across. I'm not writing a fucking paper, it's an [you mean 'a'] response in a damn forum.
And what, if not that, are you attempting to do when you express your opinion?
BTW:
You mean the people don't like to be criticized. [question mark required]
As someone who is constantly picked on by these people, I can say that more than often, [unnecessary comma] they are rude, and [required] have very little to add to any discussion, other than showing off their impressive command of the English language. I'd be more receptive to this criticism [add this] if some of them made their response to the thread at hand, [unnecessary comma] and did [incorrect verb: "and ended with" works] a BTW, but that's not what happens. Usually they are just have [unnecessary] one line responses [needs the 's' to accord with 'they'] that is [are] rude, and [unnecessary] often picking [just 'pick'] on one or two 'mistakes' [quotes unnecessary
Am I missing something here?
Yes, good humor, understanding, and basic people skills.
Language definately evolves, what may be "right" today may be painful to read tomorrow.
As a corollary, what may be right tomorrow may be painful to read today.
Je prendre un cafe au lait
:P "Café au lait" is English.
I think you mean "je prendrai un café crème."
Or make him a slashdot editor and he can post his own damn stuff; then we can filter him like JonKatz. But honestly, if I wanted to read his plagiarised crap, I'd read his site, not slashdot.
Aside from giving readers the ability to filter his crap, I can think of several legitimate uses for a Roland section:
1. A new section icon. Let me be the first to propose the Goatse man. As a beneficial side-effect, this would help encourage new readers to make the "correct" filtering decision.
2. For that matter, stories in the Roland section could have special ads targeted at masochists and the mentally deficient.
3. When trolls are identified, they could lose access to all stories *except* Roland stories.
Honestly - I see *no* downside whatsoever here. This is win-win for everyone.
No I think you're right on there. From my understanding of it, most blind users are using screen readers to navigate the web, so enhancing whatever software it is that generates the images to also produce a sound file would probably suffice.
:)
I'm not entierly sure how many blind *and* deaf users there are browsing the web unassisted, but I suppose a broader solution would depend on what technology they're using to browse the web. Some form of braille reader, perhaps? If anyone knows the answer to this, I'd be very curious to know.
If that were the case, I suppose a more universal, text based solution would be required -- this makes more sense to me anyway. Plus, Lynx users can be happy
you can spend 3 seconds typing in the word "uNFsaQ" to prove you're human.
Unless you happen to be a blind blogger. With all the effort people have put into accessibility there's got to be a validation method that can work for the blind as well.
Just mentioning this because I've seen this complaint several times by blind users on slashdot.
Dear Rahga,
You've been around here long enough that you should know no matter how many times you try to convince people, it's a lost cause. And while I've been around long enough to know the difference, I have to admit, 'cracking' just sounds retarded. Sorry. Why not call it criminal computing or criminal hacking or something? Whether anyone likes it or not, that meaning of 'hacking' is here to stay.
It's the difference between prescriptive vs. descriptive points of view on language I guess.
With the introduction of DMCA legislation in Canada yesterday
Not to go too far off topic, but keep in mind that this bill has been introduced and is not yet law; as such anyone, particularly Canadian citizens, who cares about this should stop by their MP's office, write them (preferrably on paper), or phone them and voice their opinion on this legislation.
Alphabetical list of MPs
Lookup by postal code
There's detailed contact information on each MP's page.
If you check out this article by Michael Geist, you can see the various parties' stances on copyright reform.
Summary:
Liberal - Middle of the road. Basically For.
NDP - For
BQ - For
Conservatives - Against
Green - Against
Very surprised particularly at the NDP and Conservatives stance. I voted Green last time in any case.
The full text of the Toronto Star article linked from the link above to avoid registration:
Parties the same? Not on tech issues
Surprising answers emerge from surveys
With much at stake, there's little debate
MICHAEL GEIST
LAW BYTES
With the federal election now just one week away, millions of voters are sizing up the national parties' positions on a wide range of issues. For those interested in technology law and policy issues -- including copyright, spam, and privacy -- the election campaign has been a disappointment as technology policy has barely registered on the election-issue radar.
While it may be understandable for technology policy to take a back seat to health care, national defence, and tax policy, an election campaign would be an ideal time to generate discussion and learn about positions on issues that typically stir debate throughout the year.
In recent weeks several groups have tried to capture the attention of the national parties and local candidates by posing questions on technology law policy and posting the responses online. The Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC) at the University of Ottawa, online at http://www.cippic.ca/ distributed a questionnaire to each national party covering key copyright policies issues including positions on music file sharing and Internet service provider liability as well as on spam, the use of open source software, and national ID cards (in the interests of full disclosure it should be noted that I am a faculty adviser to CIPPIC).
Similarly, Digital-Copyright Canada, a user and creator group, posed similar copyright questions (http://www.digital-copyright.ca/ to each local candidate across the country, while the Canadian Teachers' Federation asked each party for their views on copyright issues of concern to the education community.
With responses in hand from four of the five major political parties, different visions of Canadian technology law policy have begun to emerge.
The Liberal party sits squarely in the middle on these issues. Although the party's response speaks predominantly in generalities on copyright matters, it is revealing as much for what it says as what it does not.
First, the party pointed to the controversial blank-media levy as evidence it has worked to ensure Canada's copyright policy is modern and progressive, a surprising illustration given the opposition to the levy from a broad range of stakeholders.
Second, while the party noted the ongoing copyright reform process, it tellingly made no mention of the recent Canadian Heritage committee copyright report, perhaps seeking to distance itself from the report's recommendations. The committee, chaired by Toronto-area Liberal MP Sarmite Bulte, has drawn the ire of educators, Internet service providers, and copyright experts for adopting a one-sided perspective that fails to account for the interests of all copyright stakeholders.
Ms. Bulte herself offered a spirited endorsement of her committee's recommendations just days before the election call, concluding that the exceptions proposed by groups such as the Canadian education community to facilitate the use of the Internet within our schools was the wrong approach, characterizing such exceptions as leading to "freebies." Given the Liberal emphasis on education, its move away from Ms. Bulte's position may foreshadow a reconsideration of the recommendations should it form the new government.
The Liberal party also responde
You Westerners are strange that way.
Nice... let's take the attitudes of a smallish fraction of a cultural group and make sweeping generalizations about all "westerners". For someone who's attempting to make fun of people who're entrenched in their cultural beliefs, you could stand to shed a bit of bias yourself.
Not an American myself, but I'd suspect that you're exactly the kind of person who should be going back to the US to stand up for what you believe in and help turn the current political climate around.
just about anywhere if you are 'fit' relatively tall and have blue eyes. :) (I match that description almost... I could stand to lose a few...)
Just how many eyes do you have, exactly?
Again: they don't seem to be disputing the claim that they have been drinking
Drinking and driving isn't a crime. Drinking until you're intoxicated, then driving is a crime. Don't know about US law, but I do know that in Canada, if you admit to the crime that's it, you proceed to sentencing no matter what you'd like to argue. In Canada you could also submit a "no contest" and accept the charges without necessarily admitting guilt, though you'll still be sentenced. They'd have to dispute the fact that they were driving drunk to result in a not guilty.
Damn! I knew Australians were into barbequeues but that's bloody insane! You win! You win!
Just a guess, but Canada has a bit more forest than Australia, yet ratified the Kyoto protocol. We also have a ton of forest fires. on the order of 25 000 square km burn per year.
That said, I will still argue for hours on end that Australia is one of the best countries on the planet in my eyes.
For the record, while I think Canada's also a pretty damn fine country, I now live in Japan where I flush my ultra-efficient Japanese toilet every day.
And they could be doing better there
There's no "better" / "worse"; they either are abiding by the terms of the licence, or they're not. No matter what you'd like them to be doing above and beyond the terms of the licence, the fact is, they are abiding by its terms. If the Konquerer team wanted more than that, they should have selected a licence that specified as much.
If they're not meeting the terms of the licence, I would suggest you point out precisely which clauses they aren't abiding by here (where it's likely to get a lot of free publicity), to the Safari team (who can do something about it), to the KDE team (who I would hope would go after Apple with all they have, or refer their case to the FSF), and to Apple Legal (who are responsible for remedying the situation if the Safari team won't).
Seriously; if they're not meeting any of the terms, either point out which ones, or quit your complaining. If it's that you'd rather they do more than they're obliged to under the terms of the licence, then start complaining to the KDE team that they should have used a more restrictive licence, but don't complain that someone isn't going above and beyond what they're required to.
Glad I'm not the only one :) There've been a few clever mods that have made me laugh harder than a fantastically clever comment.
Sadly, it usually inspires a slew of "Man, the mods must be on crack." and "Holy crap are the mods ever stupid." comments from users who missed the joke entirely.
Yeah, and they should be sending out roses and chocolates while they're at it.
They're complying with the terms of the licence and they're putting as much or more development into webcore than the khtml guys can manage to backport into khtml. The KDE team should be happy they've got someone giving them publicity and putting development into their project whether they can backport it or not. In cases where the code is OS X specific, they can read it and use the logic.
The Safari team should focus on webcore, which is what Apple's shareholders want them to do. They shouldn't be working part-time on backporting to another, non-Apple project.
Did you hear that? It was the sound of a joke passing near-silently over your head...
Therefore your gender has nothing to do with your contracting aviary cancer.
Very astute observation. It's most likely your species that dictates your ability to develop aviary cancer.
Yeah, but only because it was in the writeup:
a ble-volume dept.
Posted by CmdrTaco on Tue May 31, 5:51
from the i-was-told-i-could-listen-to-my-radio-at-a-reason
Except for proving that they didn't by being more open they closed the door to UN inspectors.
'Cause we all no that if you're not 100% transparent you're guilty. By that logic, I hope you don't use encryption, and don't mind the government opening your mail.
As for UN inspectors, we all know exactly how much the US believes in working with the UN. You can't have it both ways.
As for liberals, I would suggest that you be a little less liberal yourself when it comes to the innovative use of hitherto unknown English spelling and grammar. In particular, I apologise if I completely misunderstood the quoted sentence, but I think I did.