Interesting that there is a PGP plugin for webmail. But I really wouldn't be comfortable with the idea that my private key is stored in the browser somewhere.
Now *that* is interesting. Heaven help us that we can't even agree across the world on how many continents there are. Good luck picking the names for people.
I chuckle that you have the hubris to think you can speak for the personal life experience of someone you don't even know and adopt an arrogant tone while doing it.
i didn't. i'm speaking for my personal experience. it's obviously different from yours.
It's hard to argue with a non-editable thread history. Good to see you have taken back your "you're wrong" and acknowledged that the words I listed: a) exist, and b) are widely used.
The difference here was that you started off arguing for the properness of one set of words over the other, while I have been making an impartial observation on their actual prevalence in usage.
I certainly agree with you that the united-states-ian words exist. I've never said otherwise.
I agree with you, it *SHOULD* work that way, that people get to pick what they call themselves, but in practice it doesn't.
Take one example (out of hundreds)...
Deutschland. This is what Germans call their country. And they call themselves Deutschlanders. Germany. This is the English name for the same thing, and the people are Germans, of course. Germania. This is what the Italians say, and they call the people **tedeschi**!! Allemagne. The French use this word for the same country.
It seems that in actual practice, each *language* chooses what they will call other places and people (or at least language per region, as I'd imagine Mexicans and Spaniards might have significant differences, for example).
The actual words used probably arose in the historical (and tribal) context in which the various peoples of the world interacted with (i.e., warred against) each other.
Your point remains though that, at least in American English (and I can't imagine the use of the word in that context can be ambiguous, except perhaps to a subset of Canadians), the Yanks (that's British English, or wait, is it non-Irish-non-Wales-British-English???) should be able to call themselves Americans without people breaking into hives. You see how silly this can quickly get!
The haters can get their panties bunched up all they want about this, but usually language just does what's expedient rather than what is exhaustively precise to avoid the fatiguing tying of tongues into twisted states. Bottom line: it's clear what an American is, and the upset people probably object to their perceived *real-world* imperialism, but get hung up on the perceived imperialism of their name instead.
The EFF redacted this entire page in response the USPTO request. Why did the USPTO not like it?... Because they got their ass summarily handed to them. The redaction compares two claims (one approved, one invalidated) that differ by LITERALLY ONLY A FEW WORDS. The USPTO is right to be embarrassed!
Yes. These are the high register words, not commonly used in normal speech, just like "the United States of America" in English (versus "the U.S.", or just "America").
No seriously, look at what you wrote for a second... do you really think Germans say "Bürger der Vereinigten Staaten" every time they mean "Amerikaner"?
So, no, I'm not wrong, as I said these are the words people *use*, and that is as true as the fact that everywhere they do, there are some people who get worked up about it.
As you say, the controversy (and also actual practice of using the term "American") exists in every language. The very existence of that controversy proves the usage point I wrote, the same point you called, "totally wrong." You have been hoisted on your own petard!
ha ha. Such a jackass statement. I chuckle that you have the hubris to think you can speak for the personal life experience of someone you don't even know and adopt an arrogant tone while doing it.
W/out revealing too much on a public forum, I'll just say that, in my life, I've spent more years than I can count on the fingers of one hand in the countries where these languages are spoken, and while, yes, the words you mentioned do exist in dictionaries, I could use less than those same fingers to count the number of times I've heard them actually used in normal speech.
The "offensive" word was american/e/o/er, etc. My point being that despite what you may wish, in actual practice, Europeans more often than not simply call US citizens, "Americans," as does everyone else.
If you wish to continue trying to dictate what I know from own experience, you may carry on the conversation with my hand, as I have no interest in you telling me your "facts."
Obviously, if you have a population of 300 million people that was formed from the most geographically diverse mixture of immigrants of any nation on the planet, statistical probability dictates that they probably suffer from a mass intellectual deficiency and are all more stupid than any other population sample. What they need is you to be their president and fix everything.
Or, maybe democracies everywhere suffer from the same systemic defects that result in fallible humans holding elected office.
Yep. I had this book in print form before the Internet even existed. Aside from the practical impossibilities of removing something from the Internet, isn't book banning considered taboo nowadays outside the Third Reich? Heaven help us that this woman holds one of the most powerful positions in the Senate.
Most European languages??? I only speak four, and here are the words they use:
Spanish: americano Italian: americano French: américain German: Amerikaner
I can go just about anywhere in the world and use one of these languages (or English). So, I'm gonna call B.S. on your statement. In fact, I find that in Europe, Europeans are more likely than US citizens to use the "offensive" word, because we Americans know we have neighbors to the south and north who don't always like it.
"America" was the word for new world in its entirety, and as the first major nation formed there that came to dominate the linguistic usage of the term for citizenry was the United States of America, the term "American" came to be used for its citizens. That makes perfect sense following the normal structural patterns of English on the root word in the name of the country. This is only "offensive" to people living in countries outside the Americas who have a bone to pick with the USA and like to look for reasons to get their panties in a bunch. People in Argentina don't get mad if you don't call them American. They would get mad if you did!!!
On the other, many people object to referring to the *country* of the USA as *America* because that is a very inaccurate *geographic* characterization and basically ignores the existence or importance of the rest of the countries in the two continents of America. So, yeah, don't do that!
Anyway, if it bothers anyone, feel free to use the fully clear and precise terminology for a person, "US citizen" or similar construction. But don't try to introduce some spurious and cacophonous atrocity of a term like "Usian". How would you even pronounce that? "Ooozian?" "You-ess-iann?" Silly rabbit.
Language is full of 'stupid' things, and in each case, it is due to historical reasons of how the usage evolved. "America" was the new world in its entirety, and as the first major nation formed there that came to dominate the linguistic usage of the term for citizenry was the United States of America, the term "American" came to be used for its citizens. That makes perfect sense following the normal structural patterns of English on the root word in the name of the country.
A *confusing* nationality term is that citizens of the Netherlands (or Holland) are called Dutch. Now *that* is confusing!
On the other, I know that many people object to referring to the *country* of the USA as *America* because that is a very inaccurate geographic characterization and basically ignores the existence or importance of the rest of the countries in the two continents of America. So, yeah, don't do that!
But to use the standardly accepted, logical, and convenient to pronounce term of *American* for a physical person, is only offensive to people living in countries outside the Americas who have a bone to pick with USA and like to look for reasons to get their panties in a bunch. People in Argentina don't get mad if you don't call them American. They would get mad if you did!!!
Anyway, if it bothers anyone, feel free to use the fully clear and precise terminology, "US citizen" or similar construction. But don't try to introduce some spurious and cacophonous atrocity of a term like "Usian" or "Usan". You will never succeed in getting that to catch on.
Linux is the only affected platform, so Windows and OS X users are safe from this particular vulnerability.
The fact that this is Linux only and not Windows or OS X really should be in the headline! Although I use Linux, this key element makes the news about 21% as important. (Write me back and I will explain the complex equation by which I arrived at that figure.);-)
There's been some back and forth, but it seems like the arms race has been pretty balanced, so far.
WTH?!?? Dude, they're able to hacking air gapped computers, install self-concealing malware in BIOS and hard drive firmware, and undermine the protocols, networks, and hardware that makeup our computer systems. There is *no* cybersecurity. Do you have your head in the sand?
Will never happen. The power production capacity of solar panels is directly proportionate to their area. Deploying myriad square miles/kilometers of solar panels into space doesn't make any sense. Not to mention the inefficiency of transmitting to Earth via "microwaves or lasers".
I have had several domains with active-domain.com AKA enom.com AKA domainpanel.com for several years. It's a good basic domain and DNS service for $11.99/yr (.com) + $2.50/yr for whoisproof. I also use easyDNS for their DNS+ services ($55/yr) on one domain. And I recently tried Amazon Route53 for a couple new domains $12/yr (.com), which includes whoisproof. The latter is good, but the $.50/month DNS fee ends up making it more money compared to enom.
She says in a statement, “It is not illegal to write or make other markings on bank notes... However, there are important reasons why it should not be done. Writing on a bank note may interfere with the security features and reduces its lifespan. Markings on a note may also prevent it from being accepted in a transaction. Furthermore, the Bank of Canada feels that writing and markings on bank notes are inappropriate as they are a symbol of our country and a source of national pride.”
Guess she's asking "please." Not sure I see the harm.
Some cool thinking by AVG, but the ideas presented have significant limitations, as they themselves acknowledge if you click through and read their actual link.
A more reliable (and perhaps feasible?) line of inquiry has been started by CV Dazzle through their use of "camouflage" glasses, facial markings, and/or hairstyles. Very interesting stuff here: http://cvdazzle.com/
Slashdot Mirror
Interesting that there is a PGP plugin for webmail. But I really wouldn't be comfortable with the idea that my private key is stored in the browser somewhere.
Now *that* is interesting. Heaven help us that we can't even agree across the world on how many continents there are. Good luck picking the names for people.
I chuckle that you have the hubris to think you can speak for the personal life experience of someone you don't even know and adopt an arrogant tone while doing it.
i didn't. i'm speaking for my personal experience. it's obviously different from yours.
It's hard to argue with a non-editable thread history.
Good to see you have taken back your "you're wrong" and acknowledged that the words I listed: a) exist, and b) are widely used.
The difference here was that you started off arguing for the properness of one set of words over the other, while I have been making an impartial observation on their actual prevalence in usage.
I certainly agree with you that the united-states-ian words exist. I've never said otherwise.
I agree with you, it *SHOULD* work that way, that people get to pick what they call themselves, but in practice it doesn't.
Take one example (out of hundreds)...
Deutschland. This is what Germans call their country. And they call themselves Deutschlanders.
Germany. This is the English name for the same thing, and the people are Germans, of course.
Germania. This is what the Italians say, and they call the people **tedeschi**!!
Allemagne. The French use this word for the same country.
It seems that in actual practice, each *language* chooses what they will call other places and people (or at least language per region, as I'd imagine Mexicans and Spaniards might have significant differences, for example).
The actual words used probably arose in the historical (and tribal) context in which the various peoples of the world interacted with (i.e., warred against) each other.
Your point remains though that, at least in American English (and I can't imagine the use of the word in that context can be ambiguous, except perhaps to a subset of Canadians), the Yanks (that's British English, or wait, is it non-Irish-non-Wales-British-English???) should be able to call themselves Americans without people breaking into hives. You see how silly this can quickly get!
The haters can get their panties bunched up all they want about this, but usually language just does what's expedient rather than what is exhaustively precise to avoid the fatiguing tying of tongues into twisted states. Bottom line: it's clear what an American is, and the upset people probably object to their perceived *real-world* imperialism, but get hung up on the perceived imperialism of their name instead.
Everyone really should click through and read page 5 of the original document: https://www.eff.org/files/2015...
The EFF redacted this entire page in response the USPTO request. Why did the USPTO not like it?... Because they got their ass summarily handed to them. The redaction compares two claims (one approved, one invalidated) that differ by LITERALLY ONLY A FEW WORDS. The USPTO is right to be embarrassed!
Yes. These are the high register words, not commonly used in normal speech, just like "the United States of America" in English (versus "the U.S.", or just "America").
No seriously, look at what you wrote for a second... do you really think Germans say "Bürger der Vereinigten Staaten" every time they mean "Amerikaner"?
So, no, I'm not wrong, as I said these are the words people *use*, and that is as true as the fact that everywhere they do, there are some people who get worked up about it.
As you say, the controversy (and also actual practice of using the term "American") exists in every language. The very existence of that controversy proves the usage point I wrote, the same point you called, "totally wrong." You have been hoisted on your own petard!
you're wrong.
ha ha. Such a jackass statement. I chuckle that you have the hubris to think you can speak for the personal life experience of someone you don't even know and adopt an arrogant tone while doing it.
W/out revealing too much on a public forum, I'll just say that, in my life, I've spent more years than I can count on the fingers of one hand in the countries where these languages are spoken, and while, yes, the words you mentioned do exist in dictionaries, I could use less than those same fingers to count the number of times I've heard them actually used in normal speech.
The "offensive" word was american/e/o/er, etc. My point being that despite what you may wish, in actual practice, Europeans more often than not simply call US citizens, "Americans," as does everyone else.
If you wish to continue trying to dictate what I know from own experience, you may carry on the conversation with my hand, as I have no interest in you telling me your "facts."
Obviously, if you have a population of 300 million people that was formed from the most geographically diverse mixture of immigrants of any nation on the planet, statistical probability dictates that they probably suffer from a mass intellectual deficiency and are all more stupid than any other population sample. What they need is you to be their president and fix everything.
Or, maybe democracies everywhere suffer from the same systemic defects that result in fallible humans holding elected office.
Nah, you're probably right.
Yep. I had this book in print form before the Internet even existed.
Aside from the practical impossibilities of removing something from the Internet, isn't book banning considered taboo nowadays outside the Third Reich?
Heaven help us that this woman holds one of the most powerful positions in the Senate.
Most European languages???
I only speak four, and here are the words they use:
Spanish: americano
Italian: americano
French: américain
German: Amerikaner
I can go just about anywhere in the world and use one of these languages (or English). So, I'm gonna call B.S. on your statement.
In fact, I find that in Europe, Europeans are more likely than US citizens to use the "offensive" word, because we Americans know we have neighbors to the south and north who don't always like it.
"America" was the word for new world in its entirety, and as the first major nation formed there that came to dominate the linguistic usage of the term for citizenry was the United States of America, the term "American" came to be used for its citizens. That makes perfect sense following the normal structural patterns of English on the root word in the name of the country. This is only "offensive" to people living in countries outside the Americas who have a bone to pick with the USA and like to look for reasons to get their panties in a bunch. People in Argentina don't get mad if you don't call them American. They would get mad if you did!!!
On the other, many people object to referring to the *country* of the USA as *America* because that is a very inaccurate *geographic* characterization and basically ignores the existence or importance of the rest of the countries in the two continents of America. So, yeah, don't do that!
Anyway, if it bothers anyone, feel free to use the fully clear and precise terminology for a person, "US citizen" or similar construction. But don't try to introduce some spurious and cacophonous atrocity of a term like "Usian". How would you even pronounce that? "Ooozian?" "You-ess-iann?" Silly rabbit.
"That's just like your opinion, man." -T.D.
Language is full of 'stupid' things, and in each case, it is due to historical reasons of how the usage evolved. "America" was the new world in its entirety, and as the first major nation formed there that came to dominate the linguistic usage of the term for citizenry was the United States of America, the term "American" came to be used for its citizens. That makes perfect sense following the normal structural patterns of English on the root word in the name of the country.
A *confusing* nationality term is that citizens of the Netherlands (or Holland) are called Dutch. Now *that* is confusing!
On the other, I know that many people object to referring to the *country* of the USA as *America* because that is a very inaccurate geographic characterization and basically ignores the existence or importance of the rest of the countries in the two continents of America. So, yeah, don't do that!
But to use the standardly accepted, logical, and convenient to pronounce term of *American* for a physical person, is only offensive to people living in countries outside the Americas who have a bone to pick with USA and like to look for reasons to get their panties in a bunch. People in Argentina don't get mad if you don't call them American. They would get mad if you did!!!
Anyway, if it bothers anyone, feel free to use the fully clear and precise terminology, "US citizen" or similar construction. But don't try to introduce some spurious and cacophonous atrocity of a term like "Usian" or "Usan". You will never succeed in getting that to catch on.
Linux is the only affected platform, so Windows and OS X users are safe from this particular vulnerability.
The fact that this is Linux only and not Windows or OS X really should be in the headline! Although I use Linux, this key element makes the news about 21% as important. (Write me back and I will explain the complex equation by which I arrived at that figure.) ;-)
YAY! April Fool's on Slashdot is finally over.
Something real to read.
OK, but seriously...
There's been some back and forth, but it seems like the arms race has been pretty balanced, so far.
WTH?!??
Dude, they're able to hacking air gapped computers, install self-concealing malware in BIOS and hard drive firmware, and undermine the protocols, networks, and hardware that makeup our computer systems.
There is *no* cybersecurity. Do you have your head in the sand?
Who's gonna win the war on drugs?
Who's gonna win the war on terror?
Who's gonna win the war on hacking?
The article linked to as "standardize the price for various services..." mentions nothing about that at all.
Will never happen.
The power production capacity of solar panels is directly proportionate to their area. Deploying myriad square miles/kilometers of solar panels into space doesn't make any sense. Not to mention the inefficiency of transmitting to Earth via "microwaves or lasers".
Except that the co-pilot "manipulated the flight monitoring system" to allow the plane to descend at 1000 meters/minute.
Jeebus, that's terrible!
Nice obscure reference. :)
I have had several domains with active-domain.com AKA enom.com AKA domainpanel.com for several years. It's a good basic domain and DNS service for $11.99/yr (.com) + $2.50/yr for whoisproof. I also use easyDNS for their DNS+ services ($55/yr) on one domain. And I recently tried Amazon Route53 for a couple new domains $12/yr (.com), which includes whoisproof. The latter is good, but the $.50/month DNS fee ends up making it more money compared to enom.
Yeah.
Her full quote is:
She says in a statement, “It is not illegal to write or make other markings on bank notes... However, there are important reasons why it should not be done. Writing on a bank note may interfere with the security features and reduces its lifespan. Markings on a note may also prevent it from being accepted in a transaction. Furthermore, the Bank of Canada feels that writing and markings on bank notes are inappropriate as they are a symbol of our country and a source of national pride.”
Guess she's asking "please." Not sure I see the harm.
The study sounds like nonsense (at least as presented in this post).
Refactoring doesn't make code easier to analyze or change.... But it may make code more maintainable.
What is code maintenance, if not analyzing and changing the code??!?!
Does code in Sri Lanka need to have its oil changed and tires rotated?!
Some cool thinking by AVG, but the ideas presented have significant limitations, as they themselves acknowledge if you click through and read their actual link.
A more reliable (and perhaps feasible?) line of inquiry has been started by CV Dazzle through their use of "camouflage" glasses, facial markings, and/or hairstyles.
Very interesting stuff here: http://cvdazzle.com/
Goodness gracious. I hope this isn't the true state of the CFAA here in the US?!!