Our high school network, as I remember it, was locked down pretty well. This was the early nineties, there was no internet access, and the network was only for remote booting the computers, and storing a few files for computer programming classes.
Anyways, there was a small, little-known, and very-little-used hard drive attached to one of the servers that was publically accesible from any terminal on the network. Even the computer teachers didn't know about it. I think it was just installed by the sysadmin for the county and then forgotten about.
I managed to hack together a program that allowed a virtual BBS and chat to take place on the school network by reading and writing files to the 'secret' shared drive. My friends and I planned to write a few simple multiplayer programs for it too, like chess or checkers that could be played over the network. (Reading/writing from the hard drive was too slow to allow anything faster than a simple turn-based game to be even remotely viable)
The program was set up so that you had to enter the location of the drive and initial or 'start' file on the remote drive to use when you connected. I did that on purpose so as to limit the number of users with access... (Incidentally, my name was never on the program, because, quite frankly, I didn't want to get in trouble if/when we were found out.) Everything was going well until another kid got his hands on the code, stuck his name on it, made it connect to the shared drive automatically, and gave it to all of his friends... who gave it to their friends....
Usage went from 8 people to about 200 people in 4 days, and it was found out by the staff.
In a sweet twist of irony, the guy who stole my code and put his name on it was yelled at by the principal and suspended for a few days. The secret hard drive was shut down.
A few weeks later, a few friends and I were in the computer lab after school, just messing around, waiting for the bus. The computer teacher was there, and he said something like, "Guys, I know [the other kid] couldn't have written the chat program, was it one of you?"
I said it was me. He said the program was pretty cool, and it was only the principal who flipped out, but I never should have distributed it. I told him about the other guy stealing my code and giving it out. He just chuckled at that.
I guess if I had done that today, they would've called the police to report a 'dangerous hacker'.
Sooo.... let's just say that our fledgling RFID industry is about to take off, and walmart is going to (probably) give it the boot it needs.
Who's supplying all this RFID equipment? Which publicly-traded companies? I don't think the public knows yet, and when wall street figures it out, and starts getting the word out, boy...
Is anybody else here a little disturbed by the implication here that math is doing the directing, given that according to Godel, mathematics is by its very nature incomplete?
That is, there are some things that are true that cannot be proven (or here predicted) by math.
And so I am left to wonder whether this mathematical prediction approach can ever give us the whole picture...
No, I believe Nintendo said that they're going to be vertically stacked......if that is the case, I'd like to see a layout like the Danger hiptop where the touchscreen is on top, for palm-pilot like use, or for games that only require one screen.
The second screen could be hidden under the first, with the top screen swivelling up and 180 degrees for two-screened games. This also means that the second screen could be used as an option, not all games would have to incorporate it, and it would be hidden and protected when not in use.
I don't see a touchpad as a replacement for an analog stick, though. Touchpads/screens STINK when used as controllers. I think it's more likely that an analog controller will take the form of a standard crosskey that responds to how hard you press. It's also possible to make a (recessed) analog control ball, instead of a stick. The old sega saturn analog controllers had these, and they were almost impossible to break.
The only thing humans are better than robot is to react at unexpected situations. [snip] What unexpected situations anyway? Suddenly a martian jumping at people?
Good one, because, as we all know, nothing unexpected ever happens in space. Let's see...
PROBLEM: Dust buildup on solar panels Robot: Screwed because no way to clean it off. Human: Wipes dust off
PROBLEM: Martian dirt is sticky. Is it because of brine, or is it anelectrostatic thing? Robot: Takes a closeup picture. Can't tell definitively. Debate ongoing. Human: Reaches down, touches dirt with glove, has a closer looks, problem solved in two seconds.
Aside: what's the latest story on that dust? I haven't bothered to read up since the last 'brine' hypotheses hit the news.
PROBLEM: Dirt has a crust on it, want to take a look what's under the dust. Robot: Fixes five wheels in place, while spinning the sixth to break the crust. Human: Takes a spade...
PROBLEM: Crater wall is steep, interesting deposits halfway down (let's presume here). Robot: Takes a zoomed-in picture but cannot climb down. Human: Climbs down, samples deposits, locates water.
The presumption that we could build a robot with the same data-gathering capabilities as a human equipped with an array of scientific equipment is absolutely preposterous, at least in this day and age.
No astronaut likes to take 10000 examples and analyses them 10000 times
No kidding, that's what robots are best suited for, at least right now. Presumably, if any such activity were planned, the astronaut would bring an auto-sampling machine of some sort with them.
Maybe in the future we'll build robots that can gather data as well as a human, but that future is still a ways off.
Let's face it, manned exploration IS orders of magnitude more expensive than unmanned
Agreed.
...doesn't provide much more benefit from a scientific viewpoint...
I think that a well-trained geologist/astronaut could pull far more information from a short walk on mars than those rovers could their whole time on the surface. Besides being infinitely more maneuverable than any robot, living astronauts can devise new experiments and fix things when they go wrong. Anything a robot can do, an astronaut in a space suit can do BETTER by several orders of magnitude.
Now, when things go wrong, it is much less tragic to lose a robot than it is to lose a space crew. However, any crew embarking on such an expedition will be fully cognizant of the risks, and I am sure that even if the trip was a guaranteed one-way ticket to mars that qualified volunteers could still be found.
Good point, I'll change it to people with masters (who of course may be in the same position)
Damn right. I tell people I'm looking into going back for a master's degree, they say "in computer sci, right?"
I say SHIT NO!
A master's in CS gets you exactly NOTHING over a BSc in the corporate world. And with a master's you're not qualified enough to teach CS, so what good is it? At least a doctorate has a hope of teaching somewhere.
>Thats interesting, especially considering his tanks, missiles, and aircraft were all soviet made, and his chemical weapons were either German or Japanese. If we did give him weapons, it wasn't very many I guess.
Well, see... your link is dated 1984... Here are three that are more current:
Choice quote from the 1st link: "on July 3, 1991, the Financial Times reported that a Florida company run by an Iraqi national had produced cyanide -- some of which went to Iraq for use in chemical weapons -- and had shipped it via a CIA contractor"
And these are just the TIP of the iceberg. The US voted for 5 resolutions in the 80's that condemned Iraq for its chemical weapon use.
Good for the US! Unfortunately, see the two links above. By the way, as long as we're talking about condemnations, the US has been condemned by the UN in the past.
Iraq is a big place. I mean, it took us 6 months to find is air force buried in the sand- how long will it take us to find a few drums of chemicals? They could be anywhere.
You mean to tell me that you consider a pile of completely unuseable, verging-on-scrap planes buried in SAND to be a viable fighting force? I mean PUH-lease... it would take weeks or months to make any of them even close to workable.
It doesn't make any sense to only lie halfway like that. I think the fact that we haven't found any weapons yet is proof that the Bush administration wasn't lying about the WMD's.
OK, now that paragraph is an excellent display of gullibility.
I think that you are simply afraid to believe that you have been lied to. I think you're afraid of the implications.
You see, it was never a question of whether or not Iraq actually had the weapons. The world saw him use them, for cryin out loud. The question now is what has happened to the weapons.
Well, the chain of events is self-evident to pretty much everyone on earth.
1) USA gave weapons to Saddam. 2) Saddam used weapons on - well, on everyone in range. 3) USA stopped giving saddam weapons. He was a good friend to the people of america, but he didn't need any more weapons. 4) Saddam's weapons were gone, because he used them all.
Fast-forward 15-odd years, and here we are.
Any questions?
The UN told Iraq they had to show us their weapons and prove the were destroyed. The fact that the whereabouts of WMDs is still a mystery is proof enough that Iraq was not in complience with the UN, and that alone is enough justification for military action.
...And by the way, am I the only one that remembers that the UN inspectors NEVER FOUND ANYTHING? Even thought they kept inspecting right up until the last minute? And what about the US's inability to produce even a single chem/bio/nuclear weapon, despite scouring the country for months, and despite capturing and questioning hundreds of iraqis?
The whereabouts of the (alleged) iraqi WMDs are not a mystery - there simply aren't any in the country.
PREDICTION: now that saddam is caught, the US will as if by magic produce a large stockpile of weapons that look to be well-hidden and very nefarious.
COROLLARY: in 30 years we'll find out that it was a hoax. If we're still around in 30 years.
2) Allow that He can, and has, created the world as we see it all before us in a single blinding instant.
3) God can perform this act of creation whenever he wants, and is unrestricted in an way in His performance of it.
Here's the question...
4) What evidence can you show me that God did NOT create the world, say, five minutes ago?
You could say, "well, I know I was here 10 minutes ago, I was here yesterday, etc..." But would you really know? I could argue that God put those memories in your head. You, I, the world, and everything around us was created 5 minutes ago, and there's nothing really wrong, from a devout creationist perspective, with my argument.
I'm not saying that God doesn't exist, just that something is wrong with creationist arguments in general. Creationists have built yourselves a little logical sandbox completely seperate from the rest of reality, and do your best to defend it.
On the other hand, it would be correct to say of the big bang that our current theories break down at that point... but that is no guarantee that this will always be so. It is possible that we will know one day
Remember that the books you read, the wine you drink, the music you listen to, or the OS you use aren't you
Then, may I ask, what is 'you'?
It would seem to me that a person is defined based on their own internal thought processes as manifest in actions.
The only things that a person can present to other people are their own likes, dislikes, choices, and actions.
Therefore your choices and actions very much define you as a person, both to yourself and to others.
Therefore your books/wine/music/os really do define part of yourself.
Combined with your link to a book on snobbery, I think that you think that you're "above it all" (whatever that means). Unless you're attempting to be ironic, but I don't think that was your aim.
OK, let's face it... a lot of the people here are either out of work, or are just starting out in life. They feel threatened by outsourcing, and rightly so.
I am just starting out, and I have a degree in comp sci. Here's the question that people here should be asking, but aren't.
The IXth Symphony certainly is a great piece of music, but the choice remains arbitrary : why not choose a 3-hour format to store Wagner's operas ?
A CS professor of mine once devoted a lecture to "the ideal size of things". In it, he related how the original CD prototype was the size of an LP record, and held hours upon hours of audio. The engineers were operating on the presumptions that more is always better.
It's not, of course, and a format with such expansive capability would present problems to music companies and producers... people would expect them to fill (or at least mostly fill) a multi-hour disc! Additionally, a large disc would be prey to warping, and would require similarly large components to read it.
And so, the 74-minutes was decreed, and here we are today.
My professor's point was that things have an ideal size. CDs are hand-size, they're not cumbersome like LPs, they're easy to handle, easy to change, but not too small to be easily lost. They're small enough to play in the car, like tapes.
A can of coke is the right size, too. It's easy for the average person to hold, and on average it's not too much drink, and it's not too little. You better believe that the coca-cola company spent many millions of dollars researching this. And if they didn't, someone else did.
I don't know how true any of my professor's story was, of course, it's entirely possible that he made it all up, but it did illustrate his point.
It's not as if ceramic tiles are made of expensive raw materials, either.
No, I don't think that they're made out of expensive material, but the real cost of the tiles comes from the fact that each and every single one is custom-fitted.
No two tiles on the space shuttle are the same - they're all perfectly formed to fit at one (and only one) location on the shuttle's belly. Each one had an indivicual serial number and design.
That said, I do have some recollection of reading once that a missing tile could be replaced, in orbit, with a gooey substance that hardened and burned off during re-entry.
I don't know about cows, buffalo or other animals as I never studied them but I guess you don't have any clue either. In fact by your comments about pigs I guess you're a muslim trying hard to justify the rules imposed by your culture and your religion. I'm sorry but if you believe something simply because everyone else around you does, then you are stupid.
I'd like to point out that the poster could also be jewish. Why are you picking on the muslims and not the jews?
What does this suggest about your own perceptions?
Slashdot Mirror
Danhm, I don't know if you've seen this yet, but you're quoted in the Toronto Star.
Thestar.com - Court rejects music lawsuit
Enjoy your 15 minutes!
Hmmm... I didn't know that you were supposed to do THAT with them, I always just ate them. To each their own, I guess.
(actually I think Canada has a few WMD of its own too, it would be interesting to check, anyones knows for real?)
Not anymore.
i thought the mounties rode around on horses...
When they do, it's usually part of a show.
Or crowd control. People get out of a horse's way, most of the time.
Something similar happened to me...
Our high school network, as I remember it, was locked down pretty well. This was the early nineties, there was no internet access, and the network was only for remote booting the computers, and storing a few files for computer programming classes.
Anyways, there was a small, little-known, and very-little-used hard drive attached to one of the servers that was publically accesible from any terminal on the network. Even the computer teachers didn't know about it. I think it was just installed by the sysadmin for the county and then forgotten about.
I managed to hack together a program that allowed a virtual BBS and chat to take place on the school network by reading and writing files to the 'secret' shared drive. My friends and I planned to write a few simple multiplayer programs for it too, like chess or checkers that could be played over the network. (Reading/writing from the hard drive was too slow to allow anything faster than a simple turn-based game to be even remotely viable)
The program was set up so that you had to enter the location of the drive and initial or 'start' file on the remote drive to use when you connected. I did that on purpose so as to limit the number of users with access... (Incidentally, my name was never on the program, because, quite frankly, I didn't want to get in trouble if/when we were found out.) Everything was going well until another kid got his hands on the code, stuck his name on it, made it connect to the shared drive automatically, and gave it to all of his friends... who gave it to their friends....
Usage went from 8 people to about 200 people in 4 days, and it was found out by the staff.
In a sweet twist of irony, the guy who stole my code and put his name on it was yelled at by the principal and suspended for a few days. The secret hard drive was shut down.
A few weeks later, a few friends and I were in the computer lab after school, just messing around, waiting for the bus. The computer teacher was there, and he said something like, "Guys, I know [the other kid] couldn't have written the chat program, was it one of you?"
I said it was me.
He said the program was pretty cool, and it was only the principal who flipped out, but I never should have distributed it.
I told him about the other guy stealing my code and giving it out.
He just chuckled at that.
I guess if I had done that today, they would've called the police to report a 'dangerous hacker'.
Sooo.... let's just say that our fledgling RFID industry is about to take off, and walmart is going to (probably) give it the boot it needs.
Who's supplying all this RFID equipment? Which publicly-traded companies? I don't think the public knows yet, and when wall street figures it out, and starts getting the word out, boy...
Heh...
Is anybody else here a little disturbed by the implication here that math is doing the directing, given that according to Godel, mathematics is by its very nature incomplete?
That is, there are some things that are true that cannot be proven (or here predicted) by math.
And so I am left to wonder whether this mathematical prediction approach can ever give us the whole picture...
No, I believe Nintendo said that they're going to be vertically stacked... ...if that is the case, I'd like to see a layout like the Danger hiptop where the touchscreen is on top, for palm-pilot like use, or for games that only require one screen.
The second screen could be hidden under the first, with the top screen swivelling up and 180 degrees for two-screened games. This also means that the second screen could be used as an option, not all games would have to incorporate it, and it would be hidden and protected when not in use.
I don't see a touchpad as a replacement for an analog stick, though. Touchpads/screens STINK when used as controllers. I think it's more likely that an analog controller will take the form of a standard crosskey that responds to how hard you press. It's also possible to make a (recessed) analog control ball, instead of a stick. The old sega saturn analog controllers had these, and they were almost impossible to break.
[note to US authorities - this is a joke, and I have no intention of committing any crimes (cyber- or otherwise) when visiting the USA]
Truly, the terrorists have won.
The only thing humans are better than robot is to react at unexpected situations.
[snip]
What unexpected situations anyway? Suddenly a martian jumping at people?
Good one, because, as we all know, nothing unexpected ever happens in space.
Let's see...
PROBLEM: Dust buildup on solar panels
Robot: Screwed because no way to clean it off.
Human: Wipes dust off
PROBLEM: Martian dirt is sticky. Is it because of brine, or is it anelectrostatic thing?
Robot: Takes a closeup picture. Can't tell definitively. Debate ongoing.
Human: Reaches down, touches dirt with glove, has a closer looks, problem solved in two seconds.
Aside: what's the latest story on that dust? I haven't bothered to read up since the last 'brine' hypotheses hit the news.
PROBLEM: Dirt has a crust on it, want to take a look what's under the dust.
Robot: Fixes five wheels in place, while spinning the sixth to break the crust.
Human: Takes a spade...
PROBLEM: Crater wall is steep, interesting deposits halfway down (let's presume here).
Robot: Takes a zoomed-in picture but cannot climb down.
Human: Climbs down, samples deposits, locates water.
The presumption that we could build a robot with the same data-gathering capabilities as a human equipped with an array of scientific equipment is absolutely preposterous, at least in this day and age.
No astronaut likes to take 10000 examples and analyses them 10000 times
No kidding, that's what robots are best suited for, at least right now. Presumably, if any such activity were planned, the astronaut would bring an auto-sampling machine of some sort with them.
Maybe in the future we'll build robots that can gather data as well as a human, but that future is still a ways off.
Agreed.
I think that a well-trained geologist/astronaut could pull far more information from a short walk on mars than those rovers could their whole time on the surface. Besides being infinitely more maneuverable than any robot, living astronauts can devise new experiments and fix things when they go wrong. Anything a robot can do, an astronaut in a space suit can do BETTER by several orders of magnitude.
Now, when things go wrong, it is much less tragic to lose a robot than it is to lose a space crew. However, any crew embarking on such an expedition will be fully cognizant of the risks, and I am sure that even if the trip was a guaranteed one-way ticket to mars that qualified volunteers could still be found.
I'm sorry, maybe I'm just an idiot, but I don't really see any of the 'spokes' in the image you linked to.
Could somebody paste a big red arrow on there for the outer-space-cluefully-impared, such as myself?
Thanks.
Good point, I'll change it to people with masters (who of course may be in the same position)
Damn right. I tell people I'm looking into going back for a master's degree, they say "in computer sci, right?"
I say SHIT NO!
A master's in CS gets you exactly NOTHING over a BSc in the corporate world. And with a master's you're not qualified enough to teach CS, so what good is it? At least a doctorate has a hope of teaching somewhere.
>>1) USA gave weapons to Saddam.
>Thats interesting, especially considering his tanks, missiles, and aircraft were all soviet made, and his chemical weapons were either German or Japanese. If we did give him weapons, it wasn't very many I guess.
Well, see... your link is dated 1984... Here are three that are more current:
Helping iraq kill with chemical weapons
Chemical weapons - the US and iraq
US-iraq weapons sales: the dossier (Google cache)
Choice quote from the 1st link: "on July 3, 1991, the Financial Times reported that a Florida company run by an Iraqi national had produced cyanide -- some of which went to Iraq for use in chemical weapons -- and had shipped it via a CIA contractor"
And these are just the TIP of the iceberg.
The US voted for 5 resolutions in the 80's that condemned Iraq for its chemical weapon use.
Good for the US! Unfortunately, see the two links above. By the way, as long as we're talking about condemnations, the US has been condemned by the UN in the past.
Iraq is a big place. I mean, it took us 6 months to find is air force buried in the sand- how long will it take us to find a few drums of chemicals? They could be anywhere.
You mean to tell me that you consider a pile of completely unuseable, verging-on-scrap planes buried in SAND to be a viable fighting force? I mean PUH-lease... it would take weeks or months to make any of them even close to workable.
Actually, my mistake... it seems that there actually was a viable fighting force buried in the desert. Oh wait... that was satire.
It doesn't make any sense to only lie halfway like that. I think the fact that we haven't found any weapons yet is proof that the Bush administration wasn't lying about the WMD's.
OK, now that paragraph is an excellent display of gullibility.
I think that you are simply afraid to believe that you have been lied to. I think you're afraid of the implications.
Well, the chain of events is self-evident to pretty much everyone on earth.
1) USA gave weapons to Saddam.
2) Saddam used weapons on - well, on everyone in range.
3) USA stopped giving saddam weapons. He was a good friend to the people of america, but he didn't need any more weapons.
4) Saddam's weapons were gone, because he used them all.
Fast-forward 15-odd years, and here we are.
Any questions?
The UN told Iraq they had to show us their weapons and prove the were destroyed. The fact that the whereabouts of WMDs is still a mystery is proof enough that Iraq was not in complience with the UN, and that alone is enough justification for military action.
...And by the way, am I the only one that remembers that the UN inspectors NEVER FOUND ANYTHING? Even thought they kept inspecting right up until the last minute? And what about the US's inability to produce even a single chem/bio/nuclear weapon, despite scouring the country for months, and despite capturing and questioning hundreds of iraqis?
The whereabouts of the (alleged) iraqi WMDs are not a mystery - there simply aren't any in the country.
PREDICTION: now that saddam is caught, the US will as if by magic produce a large stockpile of weapons that look to be well-hidden and very nefarious.
COROLLARY: in 30 years we'll find out that it was a hoax. If we're still around in 30 years.
Here's a problem in your argument:
1) Allow that there is an all-powerful God
2) Allow that He can, and has, created the world as we see it all before us in a single blinding instant.
3) God can perform this act of creation whenever he wants, and is unrestricted in an way in His performance of it.
Here's the question...
4) What evidence can you show me that God did NOT create the world, say, five minutes ago?
You could say, "well, I know I was here 10 minutes ago, I was here yesterday, etc..." But would you really know? I could argue that God put those memories in your head. You, I, the world, and everything around us was created 5 minutes ago, and there's nothing really wrong, from a devout creationist perspective, with my argument.
I'm not saying that God doesn't exist, just that something is wrong with creationist arguments in general. Creationists have built yourselves a little logical sandbox completely seperate from the rest of reality, and do your best to defend it.
On the other hand, it would be correct to say of the big bang that our current theories break down at that point... but that is no guarantee that this will always be so. It is possible that we will know one day
Remember that the books you read, the wine you drink, the music you listen to, or the OS you use aren't you
Then, may I ask, what is 'you'?
It would seem to me that a person is defined based on their own internal thought processes as manifest in actions.
The only things that a person can present to other people are their own likes, dislikes, choices, and actions.
Therefore your choices and actions very much define you as a person, both to yourself and to others.
Therefore your books/wine/music/os really do define part of yourself.
Combined with your link to a book on snobbery, I think that you think that you're "above it all" (whatever that means). Unless you're attempting to be ironic, but I don't think that was your aim.
(laughing in astonished horror) This guy needs a laptop that's got some rubber armor or something!
No, he needs a desktop.
Or an etch-a-sketch.
Sometime you don't need money to make money, just the will to rummage in the trash.
There's always the story of Wallflower, a company that makes digital picture frames. They got their start by buying ancient laptops (considered scrap) and re-shaping them.
Sometimes, you can start a business with nothing but a little cleverness, and an order from the scrapyard.
...his co-runner was a dead cat called Bill...
Bill wasn't dead! (just brain dead)
OK, let's face it... a lot of the people here are either out of work, or are just starting out in life. They feel threatened by outsourcing, and rightly so.
I am just starting out, and I have a degree in comp sci. Here's the question that people here should be asking, but aren't.
How can I become you?
What do I have to learn? How can I best learn it?
Thanks,
The IXth Symphony certainly is a great piece of music, but the choice remains arbitrary : why not choose a 3-hour format to store Wagner's operas ?
A CS professor of mine once devoted a lecture to "the ideal size of things". In it, he related how the original CD prototype was the size of an LP record, and held hours upon hours of audio. The engineers were operating on the presumptions that more is always better.
It's not, of course, and a format with such expansive capability would present problems to music companies and producers... people would expect them to fill (or at least mostly fill) a multi-hour disc! Additionally, a large disc would be prey to warping, and would require similarly large components to read it.
And so, the 74-minutes was decreed, and here we are today.
My professor's point was that things have an ideal size. CDs are hand-size, they're not cumbersome like LPs, they're easy to handle, easy to change, but not too small to be easily lost. They're small enough to play in the car, like tapes.
A can of coke is the right size, too. It's easy for the average person to hold, and on average it's not too much drink, and it's not too little. You better believe that the coca-cola company spent many millions of dollars researching this. And if they didn't, someone else did.
I don't know how true any of my professor's story was, of course, it's entirely possible that he made it all up, but it did illustrate his point.
It's not as if ceramic tiles are made of expensive raw materials, either.
No, I don't think that they're made out of expensive material, but the real cost of the tiles comes from the fact that each and every single one is custom-fitted.
No two tiles on the space shuttle are the same - they're all perfectly formed to fit at one (and only one) location on the shuttle's belly. Each one had an indivicual serial number and design.
That said, I do have some recollection of reading once that a missing tile could be replaced, in orbit, with a gooey substance that hardened and burned off during re-entry.
Don't know whatever became of that, though.
I don't know about cows, buffalo or other animals as I never studied them but I guess you don't have any clue either. In fact by your comments about pigs I guess you're a muslim trying hard to justify the rules imposed by your culture and your religion. I'm sorry but if you believe something simply because everyone else around you does, then you are stupid.
I'd like to point out that the poster could also be jewish.
Why are you picking on the muslims and not the jews?
What does this suggest about your own perceptions?
Golias (176380) wrote:
>Then you are pronouncing it wrong. Golias is the mythical Patron Saint of the goliards.
>Oh, and Saint Golias is believed by some scholars to be satirically derived from "Goliath", but it is typically pronounced closer to "Gall-ee-us"
Well La-de-freakin-da, somebody here's sure all sniffity about the sanctity of their nick!