I doubt Canada will bless the deal. The canadaian government is well known in protecting indigenous companies, Blackberry being one of them. That's why, it meddled in NorTel's affairs till the company went bankrupt.
I wish Samsung all the best.
Nortel went bankrupt because they were stupid - hiring thousands of people without even knowing where they were going to put them, never mind what job they would be doing. They figured the bubble would never end... same as the housing bubble.
ISTR that in the original star trek series the only creature who spoke but needed a translation device were the Gorn. Everyone else spoke english. And with less of an accent than Chekov.
Now what I want to see is what they translate Arnold Schwarzenagger going "Ah blah agggh da da bah Ha!" to.
On the other hand, what will happen if one of these days Microsoft gets rid of the registry? It's doable, and the debates would be more along the line of "You've got Windows in my linux!" "No, you've got linux in my Windows!"
"He or she" is proper English for referring to one person of unknown gender. It's much better than "they", because "they" is plural. It's only sloppiness that has allowed that to become acceptable usage.
I live in Canada where we have socialized medicine. Going to a doctor will only get you results if you either
A) have a broken bone and need it set (six hours from now)
B) want to have blood tests and have a dotor who is actually willing to sign the form
C) want to hear, "Go home and rest for a few days."
For anything else, you are dreaming. Forget about actually finding a doctor to look into something or run additional tests. It won't happen.
The problem is because it's perceived as "free", you get people taking up time insisting on ridiculous things like antibiotics for a viral infection. Doctor says no, they get angry and go to another doctor. Same with pain - they'll doctor shop (and report increasing severity of symptoms) until a doctor finally prescribes them hydromorphone. They bring it to the pharmacist, who knows they're a crackhead with a long history of legal and illegal drug abuse, calls the doctor, and it gets substituted with a placebo, which works.
And then you have the people who absolutely refuse to follow their doctors' recommendations - they don't take their medication "because I feel fine now so I don't need it any more" and then end up going to the ER by ambulance covered in their own feces and urine, they won't make any of the lifestyle changes the doctor recommends because, worse case scenario, they'll get a transplanted organ so why worry (they don't think of how they won't be a suitable recipient because by then there's too much else wrong with them).
Or they lie about taking their meds or following instructions, leading the doctor on a wild goose chase trying to find something that works. All these types of cases are avoidable if the patient would just take the doctor's advice for once instead of expecting more pills and other drugs to "fix it."
Canada has socialized medicine. Family doctors are paid a flat amount per patient visit by the government.
I'll let you guess how motivating a difficult diagnosis is for a doctor here vs "My timmy has a cold!"
Your same failure is a failure in any environment where people are paid for their labour. About the only case where it doesn't fail that I can think of is communism.
And the family doctor (if you have one - I don't) will quickly refer you to a specialist because that's the right thing to do. Doesn't waste your time or his/her time. Or if it's serious, go to the ER and you'll see a specialist the same day. And if you need a doctor for follow-up care, isn't it better to have a specialist doing it rather than the delays associated with a G.P. playing broken telephone with the specialists?
I have 4 different specialists who I see on a regular basis, and if something crops up between regular visits, I just have to make a phone call. They answer my questions, they describe what's going on, and I think they're all great.
It's funny because this is SO in contrast to the experiences of some of the people I know who have nothing to do but complain about their doctors. Same Canadian system, even the same hospitals, but you wouldn't believe it listening to them. I think a big part of that problem is their attitude. They go to the doctor and they already have it in their heads what the doctor should do, and if the doctor doesn't, "they're crap." Me, when I go, I say "I think I need your help", ask questions in a non-confrontational way, thank them, and follow their directions. Just like I talk to and thank the technicians, the resident doctors, the nurses, the medical secretaries, and the receptionists.
Attitudes matter. I've seen people get mad because we had to wait a few hours because our doctor was called out. The reason - emergency surgery on a newborn's eyes. Me, I figure "Hey take all the time you need."
And the EFF way, just steal their work ("force them to make it open") so it can't be sold for a profit and they end up homeless and starving isn't much better. How many of the people posting here actually would have a job if their bosses couldn't sell their work?
It was abandoned in the 16th century, just as we abandoned "Thee" and "Thou". People also increasingly write "I'll axe you" when they mean "I'll ask you", or "I'm going their" instead of "I'm going there." Or "grammer" instead of "grammar."
I wasn't referring to the word "niggardly" when I referred to "the 'N' word", and pretending that you didn't know the word I was referring to is disingenuous.
"They is grammatically incorrect when referring to a single person." "They" is plural. Referring to someone of unknown gender as "he or she" in the first mention, then switching to a gender-specific pronoun afterwards is acceptable, as is mixing gender pronouns throughout the rest of the page, or then using "the person".
Except that "they" is grammatically incorrect when referring to a single person. It's a kludge. Using "he or she" is perfect - it's singular, and it's why more and more people are using it. Obsolete customs are poor not justifications for preserving a grammar "rule" that isn't even grammatical.
You can't use one method in one sentence and another method in the next sentence while referring to the same unknown person. Consistency is key.
Sure you can. People do it all the time. We've rejected the patriarchal view that "he" is always the way to refer to someone when you don't know their gender, and "it" objectifies people and is insulting. There's one troll who is following me around all the time posting comments like " You're not a person. You're an 'it " Fortunately nobody gives APK (the HOSTS file troll) any credence, even when he posts his turds against me more than 100 times a day.
"Artificial scarcity" my arse. Much of that stuff would never have been produced in the first place if the authors didn't have a hope of making money off it.
It fascinates me that he can even publish them without running into copyright issues.
He can't. Here is the relevant portion of Simtropolis TOS:
By making services available to you, the site editor is not providing you with any implied or express licenses or rights, and you will have no rights to make any commercial use of this web site or provided services without the site editor's prior written consent.
Worse, he's not even providing attribution to the individual comment authors.
So according to your definition, a single-income family with a spouse and 3 kids with an income of over $100,000 is still living in poverty. I don't think so.
That game has more problems than just the homeless population.
So does the author:
Bittanti says that it's impossible to distinguish between videogames and America in the same way that Jean Baudrillard thought it was impossible to distinguish between Disneyland and America. The book, he told me, is about simulation and its discontents, the unexpected convergence and collapse between reality and simulation.
"To me video games are the so-called 'real America,'" he said. "The real America operates according to a video game logic, and that game logic is neo-liberalism, and that absolutely manifests in San Francisco, that to me is the epicenter of inequality. In San Francisco you either have a Tesla and you drink a seven dollar cappuccino or you're homeless in the streets."
I think he's been playing games too long. SimCity's reality distortion field claims another victim, which is amazing because it's crap compared to its' predecessors.
Claim 1: "A method, including receiving, by a computer executing a non-tactile three dimensional (3D) user interface, a set of multiple 3D coordinates representing a gesture by a hand positioned within a field of view of a sensing device coupled to the computer, the gesture including a first motion with a closed fist in a first direction along a selected axis in space, followed by a second motion of raising the middle finger in the same direction".
Claim 2 "As per claim one, where the raising of the middle finger is replaced by raising the the pinky and index fingers in the same direction".
Claim 3: "As per claim 1, except that the first motion of the hand is raised in a closed fist, with the thumb pointing up, then a second motion in a different axis where the thumb ends up pointing down."
A limited run of 99 copies of How to get Rid of Homeless is available from Bittanti's Concrete Press via Amazon. Volume I is $150 and Volume II is $70.
Like anyone's going to pay $220.00 for a collection of reddit posts...
They lost their way after SimCity 4 + Rush Hour. For aficionados of previous versions of the game, read the reviews first, it'll save you money. As for the "books", you can get the raw posts from reddit and the Simcity site.
Personally, I don't have much use for the EFF because they take the position of zealots, and as we saw with the 12 dead yesterday, zealotry is for dummies.
Are you seriously comparing "zealots" defending your rights to terrorists who kill people in cold blood for drawing a cartoon??
Sheesh. Get some fucking perspective!
Sheesh, why don't you get some perspective? The EFF isn't defending my right or your rights with this. They're attention-starved hand-wringing over what is a non-issue because they in their zealotry are blind to the larger issue, which is that in a free society with copyright law, people are allowed to set restrictions on how their work is used, to keep it closed-source, to license it how they want. It's how they pay the bills. Zealots like the foot-cheese-eating RMS would deprive people of all their rights, as well as the fruit of their labors.
Apple developers had the choice to develop for a "more open" platform if they didn't like the terms. They chose not to, and the EFF wants the deal changed retroactively via a petition using an Android app? Like most zealots, they can't see beyond their own agenda.
It is 100% "proper grammar", and an online article from a magazine editor isn't enough to change that.
I've always been
more a fan of "they" for a singular person of undetermined gender but "he" has been around for far too long to start calling it wrong.
from the first page of results for googling "he or she grammar"
For years, if the gender of an individual referred to in a sentence is unknown, “he” would be used as the generic pronoun.
“We don’t know who started the fire,” a police officer might say, “but he will be held responsible.”
It is understood, by both the police officer and any listeners, that “he” could refer to either a woman or a man.
However, as culture changes, so does the language along with it, and many believe that the exclusive use of “he” for a person of unknown gender is sexist. There are a few options in this situation.
An archaic way of dealing with the issue is to use “one,” as in “One never knows what one can expect.”
Using this pronoun is often clunky and results in some strange-sounding sentences.
“He or she” can be used in moderation, but it cannot be used too many times at once: “he or she knows that if he or she needs to talk, he or she can visit his or her professor.”
Some use “they,” but this word cannot be used with a singular antecedent—it is only used with plurals.
Traditionally, he and him were used to refer to both genders in formal writing:
If anyone has any evidence to oppose this view, let him inform the police immediately.
Nowadays, we often see gender neutral forms (e.g. he or she, he/she, s/he, (s)he, they and him or her, him/her, them) when we do not know if the person referred to is male or female:
The bank manager could help with your problem. He or she will probably be able to give you a loan. (or he/she will probably be able to or they will probably be able to )
Go to a hairdresser. Ask him or her to come up with a style that suits you, your hair, your lifestyle. (or ask him/her to come up with a style or ask them to come up with a style )
When you get into the building, go to the person on the desk in the reception area. They can tell you where to go. (or He or she can tell you where to go.)
Language changes. There are plenty of words that previous generations used (eg: the "N" word, "Mistress" for the female head of the house) without a second thought - but usage has changed.
Slashdot Mirror
I doubt Canada will bless the deal. The canadaian government is well known in protecting indigenous companies, Blackberry being one of them. That's why, it meddled in NorTel's affairs till the company went bankrupt.
I wish Samsung all the best.
Nortel went bankrupt because they were stupid - hiring thousands of people without even knowing where they were going to put them, never mind what job they would be doing. They figured the bubble would never end ... same as the housing bubble.
Now what I want to see is what they translate Arnold Schwarzenagger going "Ah blah agggh da da bah Ha!" to.
On the other hand, what will happen if one of these days Microsoft gets rid of the registry? It's doable, and the debates would be more along the line of "You've got Windows in my linux!" "No, you've got linux in my Windows!"
"He or she" is proper English for referring to one person of unknown gender. It's much better than "they", because "they" is plural. It's only sloppiness that has allowed that to become acceptable usage.
Well, we can always see if they can keep a roof over their head at the poverty line if you throw in $300 a month for prescription drugs.
Using it / they for a single person, it's not clear that we're only talking about one person
They walked into a door.
Using he or she works, but ...
He or she walked into a door.
2nd person:
You walked into a door. Ouch! Then you were eaten by a grue.
I live in Canada where we have socialized medicine. Going to a doctor will only get you results if you either A) have a broken bone and need it set (six hours from now) B) want to have blood tests and have a dotor who is actually willing to sign the form C) want to hear, "Go home and rest for a few days."
For anything else, you are dreaming. Forget about actually finding a doctor to look into something or run additional tests. It won't happen.
The problem is because it's perceived as "free", you get people taking up time insisting on ridiculous things like antibiotics for a viral infection. Doctor says no, they get angry and go to another doctor. Same with pain - they'll doctor shop (and report increasing severity of symptoms) until a doctor finally prescribes them hydromorphone. They bring it to the pharmacist, who knows they're a crackhead with a long history of legal and illegal drug abuse, calls the doctor, and it gets substituted with a placebo, which works.
And then you have the people who absolutely refuse to follow their doctors' recommendations - they don't take their medication "because I feel fine now so I don't need it any more" and then end up going to the ER by ambulance covered in their own feces and urine, they won't make any of the lifestyle changes the doctor recommends because, worse case scenario, they'll get a transplanted organ so why worry (they don't think of how they won't be a suitable recipient because by then there's too much else wrong with them).
Or they lie about taking their meds or following instructions, leading the doctor on a wild goose chase trying to find something that works. All these types of cases are avoidable if the patient would just take the doctor's advice for once instead of expecting more pills and other drugs to "fix it."
Canada has socialized medicine. Family doctors are paid a flat amount per patient visit by the government.
I'll let you guess how motivating a difficult diagnosis is for a doctor here vs "My timmy has a cold!"
Your same failure is a failure in any environment where people are paid for their labour. About the only case where it doesn't fail that I can think of is communism.
And the family doctor (if you have one - I don't) will quickly refer you to a specialist because that's the right thing to do. Doesn't waste your time or his/her time. Or if it's serious, go to the ER and you'll see a specialist the same day. And if you need a doctor for follow-up care, isn't it better to have a specialist doing it rather than the delays associated with a G.P. playing broken telephone with the specialists?
I have 4 different specialists who I see on a regular basis, and if something crops up between regular visits, I just have to make a phone call. They answer my questions, they describe what's going on, and I think they're all great.
It's funny because this is SO in contrast to the experiences of some of the people I know who have nothing to do but complain about their doctors. Same Canadian system, even the same hospitals, but you wouldn't believe it listening to them. I think a big part of that problem is their attitude. They go to the doctor and they already have it in their heads what the doctor should do, and if the doctor doesn't, "they're crap." Me, when I go, I say "I think I need your help", ask questions in a non-confrontational way, thank them, and follow their directions. Just like I talk to and thank the technicians, the resident doctors, the nurses, the medical secretaries, and the receptionists.
Attitudes matter. I've seen people get mad because we had to wait a few hours because our doctor was called out. The reason - emergency surgery on a newborn's eyes. Me, I figure "Hey take all the time you need."
Nope, because those experts are not as good as everyone makes them out to be.
Their only advantage is they were rich and paid for college. They are not any smarter than a guy working for $12.00 in a foundry fixing a welder.
And this is why we don't get our medical advice from slashdot. But please, don't let that stop you ....
Well, since they're on the Russian side, they can now borrow the "Universal Repair Tool" - duct tape - from the Russians.
And the EFF way, just steal their work ("force them to make it open") so it can't be sold for a profit and they end up homeless and starving isn't much better. How many of the people posting here actually would have a job if their bosses couldn't sell their work?
It was abandoned in the 16th century, just as we abandoned "Thee" and "Thou". People also increasingly write "I'll axe you" when they mean "I'll ask you", or "I'm going their" instead of "I'm going there." Or "grammer" instead of "grammar."
I wasn't referring to the word "niggardly" when I referred to "the 'N' word", and pretending that you didn't know the word I was referring to is disingenuous.
"They is grammatically incorrect when referring to a single person." "They" is plural. Referring to someone of unknown gender as "he or she" in the first mention, then switching to a gender-specific pronoun afterwards is acceptable, as is mixing gender pronouns throughout the rest of the page, or then using "the person".
Except that "they" is grammatically incorrect when referring to a single person. It's a kludge. Using "he or she" is perfect - it's singular, and it's why more and more people are using it. Obsolete customs are poor not justifications for preserving a grammar "rule" that isn't even grammatical.
You can't use one method in one sentence and another method in the next sentence while referring to the same unknown person. Consistency is key.
Sure you can. People do it all the time. We've rejected the patriarchal view that "he" is always the way to refer to someone when you don't know their gender, and "it" objectifies people and is insulting. There's one troll who is following me around all the time posting comments like " You're not a person. You're an 'it " Fortunately nobody gives APK (the HOSTS file troll) any credence, even when he posts his turds against me more than 100 times a day.
"Artificial scarcity" my arse. Much of that stuff would never have been produced in the first place if the authors didn't have a hope of making money off it.
It fascinates me that he can even publish them without running into copyright issues.
He can't. Here is the relevant portion of Simtropolis TOS:
By making services available to you, the site editor is not providing you with any implied or express licenses or rights, and you will have no rights to make any commercial use of this web site or provided services without the site editor's prior written consent.
Worse, he's not even providing attribution to the individual comment authors.
So according to your definition, a single-income family with a spouse and 3 kids with an income of over $100,000 is still living in poverty. I don't think so.
What can you expect from a dictionary publisher that picked "selfie" as the word of the year in 2013 and "vape" for 2014
Is 'Slashdot' Bennet Haselton a Bug Or a Feature?
"You've got a bug in my feature!" ... It's our featured bug!"
"You've got a feature in my bug!"
"I have an idea
That game has more problems than just the homeless population.
So does the author:
Bittanti says that it's impossible to distinguish between videogames and America in the same way that Jean Baudrillard thought it was impossible to distinguish between Disneyland and America. The book, he told me, is about simulation and its discontents, the unexpected convergence and collapse between reality and simulation.
"To me video games are the so-called 'real America,'" he said. "The real America operates according to a video game logic, and that game logic is neo-liberalism, and that absolutely manifests in San Francisco, that to me is the epicenter of inequality. In San Francisco you either have a Tesla and you drink a seven dollar cappuccino or you're homeless in the streets."
I think he's been playing games too long. SimCity's reality distortion field claims another victim, which is amazing because it's crap compared to its' predecessors.
Claim 1: "A method, including receiving, by a computer executing a non-tactile three dimensional (3D) user interface, a set of multiple 3D coordinates representing a gesture by a hand positioned within a field of view of a sensing device coupled to the computer, the gesture including a first motion with a closed fist in a first direction along a selected axis in space, followed by a second motion of raising the middle finger in the same direction".
Claim 2 "As per claim one, where the raising of the middle finger is replaced by raising the the pinky and index fingers in the same direction".
Claim 3: "As per claim 1, except that the first motion of the hand is raised in a closed fist, with the thumb pointing up, then a second motion in a different axis where the thumb ends up pointing down."
A limited run of 99 copies of How to get Rid of Homeless is available from Bittanti's Concrete Press via Amazon. Volume I is $150 and Volume II is $70.
Like anyone's going to pay $220.00 for a collection of reddit posts ...
They lost their way after SimCity 4 + Rush Hour. For aficionados of previous versions of the game, read the reviews first, it'll save you money. As for the "books", you can get the raw posts from reddit and the Simcity site.
Are you seriously comparing "zealots" defending your rights to terrorists who kill people in cold blood for drawing a cartoon??
Sheesh. Get some fucking perspective!
Sheesh, why don't you get some perspective? The EFF isn't defending my right or your rights with this. They're attention-starved hand-wringing over what is a non-issue because they in their zealotry are blind to the larger issue, which is that in a free society with copyright law, people are allowed to set restrictions on how their work is used, to keep it closed-source, to license it how they want. It's how they pay the bills. Zealots like the foot-cheese-eating RMS would deprive people of all their rights, as well as the fruit of their labors.
Apple developers had the choice to develop for a "more open" platform if they didn't like the terms. They chose not to, and the EFF wants the deal changed retroactively via a petition using an Android app? Like most zealots, they can't see beyond their own agenda.
(Different AC)
It is 100% "proper grammar", and an online article from a magazine editor isn't enough to change that.
I've always been more a fan of "they" for a singular person of undetermined gender but "he" has been around for far too long to start calling it wrong.
from the first page of results for googling "he or she grammar"
It's more than just writer's digest.
Here
If your child is thinking about a gap year, ? can get good advice from this website.
A researcher has to be completely objective in ? findings.
In the past, people tended to use the pronouns he, his, him, or himself in situations like this:
If your child is thinking about a gap year, he can get good advice from this website.
A researcher has to be completely objective in his findings.
Today, this approach is seen as outdated and sexist. There are other options which allow you to arrive at a ‘gender-neutral’ solution, as follows:
You can use the wording ‘he or she’, ‘his or her’, etc.:
If your child is thinking about a gap year, he or she can get good advice from this website.
A researcher has to be completely objective in his or her findings.
and here
He or She in Unknown Gender
For years, if the gender of an individual referred to in a sentence is unknown, “he” would be used as the generic pronoun.
“We don’t know who started the fire,” a police officer might say, “but he will be held responsible.”
It is understood, by both the police officer and any listeners, that “he” could refer to either a woman or a man.
However, as culture changes, so does the language along with it, and many believe that the exclusive use of “he” for a person of unknown gender is sexist. There are a few options in this situation.
An archaic way of dealing with the issue is to use “one,” as in “One never knows what one can expect.”
Using this pronoun is often clunky and results in some strange-sounding sentences.
“He or she” can be used in moderation, but it cannot be used too many times at once: “he or she knows that if he or she needs to talk, he or she can visit his or her professor.”
Some use “they,” but this word cannot be used with a singular antecedent—it is only used with plurals.
and
Traditionally, he and him were used to refer to both genders in formal writing:
If anyone has any evidence to oppose this view, let him inform the police immediately.
Nowadays, we often see gender neutral forms (e.g. he or she, he/she, s/he, (s)he, they and him or her, him/her, them) when we do not know if the person referred to is male or female:
The bank manager could help with your problem. He or she will probably be able to give you a loan. (or he/she will probably be able to or they will probably be able to )
Go to a hairdresser. Ask him or her to come up with a style that suits you, your hair, your lifestyle. (or ask him/her to come up with a style or ask them to come up with a style )
When you get into the building, go to the person on the desk in the reception area. They can tell you where to go. (or He or she can tell you where to go.)
Language changes. There are plenty of words that previous generations used (eg: the "N" word, "Mistress" for the female head of the house) without a second thought - but usage has changed.