Pearl Harbour was mostly unprovoked - or unjustified by any measure.
The inmates at Guantanemo Bay are ntitled to whatever protections actually apply.
The Geneva conventions apply to soldiers in uniform - if they were -then they are.
The Constitution applies in various ways.
For example: State actors were not required to recognize the civil rights of persons (usually blacks and women) until the 14 ammendment (circa 1900)
The argument that foriegn nationals on foriegn soil are somehow protected by the Constitution is interesting - doubtful that it will be found so.
Perhaps the US has a treaty - internation, cuba, Iraq, french even that specifies the limitations of US power on foriegn soils within the context of war.
Here's the problem: What you have amounts to US Police powers in foriegn countries - and what "Bill of Rights" extends to non-uniformed "persons of interest"
I think the Geneva writers left that out.
As the occupying force - we are required to provide basic needs and to some extent security - which means police authority.
But it doesn't mean caviar - and it doesn't mean the right to a professionally defended jury trial.
Whatever process exists - will be the creation of the occupying force of which George - I can barely ride a bike - Bush is the President.
That is the cost of liberals buying votes with welfare.
They need to get a grip - and start contributing to international problems rather than shilling dependancies like drugs.
Yeah - The bottom line is they have a workforce which is simultaneously very productive - and happy to live in cellblocks no larger than american jails
They are monocultural - which means they do not experience (minority based solutions) they exhibit low rate of population growth,
And which the (minor by comparison) exception of pearl harbor they do not carry a history of sensless genecide.
First I think there is a place for ironed - if not perfectly ironed shirts (pants too!)
But I think the right price is closer to $149 dollars after mail in rebate.
This thing is slow and a bit difficult to use - at 15 minutes per shirt - it certainly is not going to shorten the time requirements of ironing - but might improve multitasking.
Most modern medicone involves testing chemical, therapudic, or invasive procedures on a specified range of complaints - submitting the results to the FDA and then "Practicing" the application of proven remedies on patients which fit the indicated profile.
Sure the inventive side of this is unniquely human.
But the Practice side of medicine is largely bedside manners and statistical cross referancing.
Your'e question regarding help should be answered like this - would I rather gget on the phone and talk to someone about my computer problems - or take my chances with Google?
I'd google in a heartbeat. Most problems have been experienced before - and a good many have been committed to the web. As such the Web is a better source of information than any randomly selected person - and most experts.
And if you think that all it takes to assemble a car is welding and painting - I wouldn't want to drive your chevy.
Nonetheless, many autombile workers have been replaced by robots.
Much of what doctors do - fails to justify the high cost of medicine. - Not all of it - but a great deal could be done with less cost by good data analysis, and self interaction with the raw data (navigating an OLAP cube is remarkably intuative - if it were appropriately expressed in a familiar metaphor - I think people could input their own description of problems and come awfully close to the remedy - even with google - one can get in the neighborhood - and I would suggest that Google's next frontier will be to deliver intelligence from its datapools - when that happens - the oracles of high cost knowledge will be equaliized in the marketplace.
And that I suggest is the most important thing to happen in computing in the next 30 years.
It is unlikely that more people as a percent of population will end up flipping burgers as a result of technical advances - in fact the opposite is much more likely to be true - as McDonalds is already emplementing automated drink machines, and I think a machine has been made that cooks and dispenses decent fries.
The real question is what excatly happens when we resolve the major cost centers in our current economic state.
I suggested that major cost centers include lawyering and doctoring - not in their entirety, but as a good place to start looking.
ironically garbage collection is quite cheap - as automating manual labor is not half so valuable as automating dangerous or expensive labour.
Police robots are an obvious exammple as are UAVs
But what happens when people agree to resolve their differeances by submitting their complaint in the form of an Ask Slashdot question, and being bound by the conclusion of the highest ranking opinion? (we would have to release the 5 cap)
What happens when we take the raw data from double blind studies and then allow patients to enter their own experiences as factors into the OLAP dimensions and output the quantitative answer - asprin - reduce risk by 20% - cost 5cents.
Midolanilin - reduce symptoms in 46% of patients - cost $45 bucks.
Hyprobarbicane - reduce symtom in 35% of patients.
Though aspects of both are reducable to programs e.g.,
I'm not implying that statistical analysis would replace trained professions per se.
I am suggesting however that GROUPS of people properly vetted by a turing test and linked by an algorithmic paradigm (not completely unlike slashdot) could resolve complex questions less expensively and faster with as or more consistent results.
In the end - a lot of law boils down to a selfselected panel of 12 unemployed morons.
As for medicine - sure a great deal of medicine - as a great deal of car manufacturing is outside the scope of automation - but a goodly portion is susceptible to the cost advantages and direct feedback of a statistical engine.
I would hope that in reducing a great deal of "the Practice" to automation - we could afford more experimentation, invention and so on.
Its interesting that a lot of medical experimentation is done by Undoctors - Dean Kamen - not to belabour the point = but I think her made his money inventing a medical device - and is not a doctor.
My philosophy suggests that "trained professionals" artificiallly inflate the cost of living for "untrained professionals" and that this effect is always ripe for the arbitrage of automation.
I think we can agree that computers - or technology in general replaces workers.
I remember Arnold B Scrivener - the story of a scrivener (hand copier) left useless by the invention of the typewritter.
So robotics are edging out industrial line mechanics.
I suggest that good software will soon be edging out intellecual translators - the people who speak in professional languages because the "rest of us don't understand" like Lawyers for example.
even doctors - essentially translate a list of complaints into a latin based "syndrome" and cross referance the necessary chemistry.
Politicians are necessary in order to facilitate "groupthink" - but computers could enable large groups to communicate and express agraggated (sic) opinion without the need for an intermediary.
So the issue of shape and size is pedantic - the question is how will technology change the balance of power between segment of society with variant skill sets?
Another Point - as long as computers are sold in the same room as large screen TVs with booming surround sound (in 24hr demo mode of course) The relatively inert sound from a computer is not likely to strike the consumer at the point of purchase.
The probleem of cooling Micros is that the heat is quite centralized.
A large slow fan would as you suggest move the same air - but it would fail to produce the airspeed neccessary in a finite location.
The problem is primarily economic.
power supplies have been engineered by cost to such a point that any alternative tends to be much more expensive - because it loses the advantage of low cost design AND the advantage of high scale production at the same time.
Likewise motherboards - which if they were designed in an aerodynamic case COULD use less cooling - simply don't because the motherboard would them be a custom design and less suitable for a mass production.
The issue then is really one of consumer awareness. If the TV add with Steven saying "Mrs. Mclehattle is getting a QUIET DELL" doesn't move people as much as the "more for less" slogan - the mass market isn't likely to shift off of dirt cheap mode.
Which in final analysis suggests that noise control by and large will be a user level customization - until moore's law renders a useful machine without the need for cooling - which is quite predictable given there are solid state models on the market now with higher speeds than the first pentium.
you gotta figure about two weeks until the girl at the sign-in counter at gold's gym ask for your street address and "permission to do a street address verification" which is standard for all new members - just like the SS number and bank account routing number please.
Laptops are delicate and easy to steal. If you have one outside your fortress - you are shackled to the thing. You cannot put it down - check it - put it in overhead storage, or under the table.
In public places it will evaporate faster than spilled vodka.
Travellers want to carry less of the computer and borrow a big display and keyboard at the hotel destination if necessary.
You can give a presentation from a small box with a big HD.
You can get email on a small box with a small display.
You could edit / practice - even give your presentation at the hotel by connecting to the TV.
you can check the keyboard in luggage.
Here's an idea for small screen - big results:
Since most of the screen is options and button which you rarely use. Create a virtual screen in which the edges are condensed or compressed. The scroll bars would be very narrow, the title bar would be a thin blue line - which would stretch as your curser approached.
Then you would feel pretty comfortable on a small screen
No - the Hard Disk in the end is what makes the thing valuable.
People who do real work need access to large stores of data - without the cost of parsing what to bring and not.
I'm going somewhere - I bring a. My Laptop or B. My PDA-HD with a verbatim copy of "My Docs" folder.
Do I need everything? No.
But Do I have the time to go through everything and sort out what is it I don't need?
What's wanted here is a small screen - which = long life.
Small size - for weight and pocketability
minimal utility - for killing transit time
And Serious storage.
People who have storage know what to do with it. They store pictures, music or both - They Store Source Code.
People who have a PDA - universally say they don't know what to do with it. (Not a flame - if you think so skip this post). Almost everyone has or had one and doesn't use it.
The solution however is the stop and start HD of the iPod. If you can make the HD unnecessary - but available when needed - you can get serious battery life. - combine with a useable screen for personal movies, pictures, notes etc, keyboard with qwery, and option of wifi - you have a useful device.
My prediction - cellphone with 1" 20MB HD shown by the end of the year - available by christmas of next year. (download ringtones and movies)
Its "Unfair" to attack noncombatants unnecessarily.
The Word "unfair" here implies a fairness construct - but there is no such thing.
Really it amounts to this:
If Iraq and Iran are fighting - the world will stay out until it becomes apparent that one side is substantially "unfair" meaning a threat to polite society.
Whatever else you may think - the Palestinians have lost their cause by resorting to "unfair" tactics.
The world does well to put a price on such unfair tactics - and the price reflects varying degrees of support.
My Impression has been that patents are the new tragedy of the commons. Everyboody want to condemn the use of patents (or proprietary software / IP in general) while at the same time, they want to use the patent system, or free software too build something they can markeet with competative advantage.
How many OS programmers do you know who aren't trying to figure out how to "embrace and extend" Open Source in a way that creates a saleable product?
If they aren't full time - perhaps - but serious OS'ers need income just like anyone else - and selling free beer doesn't fill bellies.
We need to understand that the issue has more to do with general monopoly exploitation and less to do with the methods used by monopolies to exploit. (Patents - or patent violations)
The important issue is that innovation and patriated wealth comes from small businesses and entrepenuers, while exploitation and expatriated wealth (sheltered offshore accounts - and overwhelming political contributions) come from allowing large corporation to have a disporportiate number of seats at the proverbial table.
But the traffic analysis of patents on Slashdot suggests that every patent is a threat to free beer or something like that.
Before you (we) will get a seat at the table where these issues are hammered out - we need to have more than a reactionary basis for a superior position.
Because time spent on research and developmenet is by definition not spent gaining a profit by direct participation in the market, Innovators are by definition poor.
The rights of innovators to convert the time in R& D to profits later is what motivates (And in all analysis - funds them)
If innovators are not protected from those who keep their powder dry by doing nothing until the idea is created and proven in the marketplace - we will have reeinvented the institution of serfdom.
Yeah - we don't like it when obvious stuff is patented premptively - but obviously having a Dell simply copy whatever it sees in the market will stifle little guys who say - why invent if the end result is merely to inspire the monsters to clobber you in the market place.
A position of equity which suggests that all people are entitled to equal degrees of intellectual freedoms and rights without regard to the ability to pay for legal protections should be the foundation of thought in IP.
Allowing money to dictate the outcome of IP conflicts is dangerous to the last bastion of American productivity - ideas.
The pursuit of any endeavor with potential income is a tax deductable expense.
Eating frogs seems to get high rating on fear factor, thus the $15 dollars i spent at the pet shop to practice is a deductable expense.
I think we should organize more professional competative fields such as to ensure that every action from pooping to scarfing hot dogs is in fact a valid professional pursuit.
This is an old argument first heard echoing around the halls of international translation.
A Table in English translates to "(a Table)" in German, but the germans have different cultural associations with the word, and thus the word Table in english in fact conjures up completely different connotations, emotions and sensibilities in the english speaker when compared to the word for the same objeect in germany.
(Not my argument - a paraphrase of classical translation pedogogy)
What we have here is a translation between base 10 for humans and base 2 for bounded arrays.
Most people use arabic notation, but in fact store and think of large numbers in base 10 scientific notation. We are essentially zero-counters when it comes to large numbers.
Computers on the other hand are first binary, and secondly store numbers in multidimentional arrays. They are not zero counters, and do not favor round numbers. Generally computers favor memory blocks which are bounded by n dimensions each of which is a exponent of 2.
All thiis to get back to the main point.
The limitations of translation ensures one will never be able to express computer number comfortable in english - and thus the attempt should be governed by the law of diminishing returns.
Is a Troll when you explore the merits of the unpopular party?
If so then I beleieve we have of a dialogue here and merely a monologue.
The essense of a discussion is tolerance for divergent points of view.
I think a troll is a farce wherein the author presumes upon the innocence of the audience by plying a hypothetical and radical position as if it were his own ostensibly to force others to make the obvious corrections.
This is my own position. I really believe she MAY have a valid interest in preserving the scientific meaning of this particular word. (She also may not) but I don't discount the idea on its face.
But IF gay or fag where words with some kind of material value ie . . . commercial, scientific or personal worth - and the term were used by a high value target - such as a TV reporter, competitor, or website then there would be some recourse available.
but common words do get co-opted and without a party to defend the erosion of meaning - language simply shifts.
In this case - there is someone to defend the meaning of the word - this is hardly the first time.
At one time it was common to say Skillsaw and mean a circular saw - so ubiquitous was the name given by Skill to their invention.
But they defended the name and we have moved on to a more appropriate generic name for the device.
You could be right - I don't know that shes not mony grubbing.
My point is simply that as google because more dominant in the mindshare of the world - this Googol word is going to be buried as to its initial definition.
Slashdot Mirror
Pearl Harbour was mostly unprovoked - or unjustified by any measure.
The inmates at Guantanemo Bay are ntitled to whatever protections actually apply.
The Geneva conventions apply to soldiers in uniform - if they were -then they are.
The Constitution applies in various ways.
For example: State actors were not required to recognize the civil rights of persons (usually blacks and women) until the 14 ammendment (circa 1900)
The argument that foriegn nationals on foriegn soil are somehow protected by the Constitution is interesting - doubtful that it will be found so.
Perhaps the US has a treaty - internation, cuba, Iraq, french even that specifies the limitations of US power on foriegn soils within the context of war.
Here's the problem: What you have amounts to US Police powers in foriegn countries - and what "Bill of Rights" extends to non-uniformed "persons of interest"
I think the Geneva writers left that out.
As the occupying force - we are required to provide basic needs and to some extent security - which means police authority.
But it doesn't mean caviar - and it doesn't mean the right to a professionally defended jury trial.
Whatever process exists - will be the creation of the occupying force of which George - I can barely ride a bike - Bush is the President.
That is the cost of liberals buying votes with welfare.
They need to get a grip - and start contributing to international problems rather than shilling dependancies like drugs.
AIK
yeah - AC has a point (perhaps 2) here.
The Japanese were fairly brutal during the war.
They killed maybe more than hilter and Stalin - mostly east asians, chinese and Koreans
Nasty.
My Bad
Yeah -
The bottom line is they have a workforce which is simultaneously very productive - and happy to live in cellblocks no larger than american jails
They are monocultural - which means they do not experience (minority based solutions) they exhibit low rate of population growth,
And which the (minor by comparison) exception of pearl harbor they do not carry a history of sensless genecide.
AIK
First I think there is a place for ironed - if not perfectly ironed shirts (pants too!)
But I think the right price is closer to $149 dollars after mail in rebate.
This thing is slow and a bit difficult to use - at 15 minutes per shirt - it certainly is not going to shorten the time requirements of ironing - but might improve multitasking.
Good to see solutions in progress however.
AIK
Most modern medicone involves testing chemical, therapudic, or invasive procedures on a specified range of complaints - submitting the results to the FDA and then "Practicing" the application of proven remedies on patients which fit the indicated profile.
Sure the inventive side of this is unniquely human.
But the Practice side of medicine is largely bedside manners and statistical cross referancing.
Your'e question regarding help should be answered like this - would I rather gget on the phone and talk to someone about my computer problems - or take my chances with Google?
I'd google in a heartbeat. Most problems have been experienced before - and a good many have been committed to the web. As such the Web is a better source of information than any randomly selected person - and most experts.
AIK
And if you think that all it takes to assemble a car is welding and painting - I wouldn't want to drive your chevy.
Nonetheless, many autombile workers have been replaced by robots.
Much of what doctors do - fails to justify the high cost of medicine. - Not all of it - but a great deal could be done with less cost by good data analysis, and self interaction with the raw data (navigating an OLAP cube is remarkably intuative - if it were appropriately expressed in a familiar metaphor - I think people could input their own description of problems and come awfully close to the remedy - even with google - one can get in the neighborhood - and I would suggest that Google's next frontier will be to deliver intelligence from its datapools - when that happens - the oracles of high cost knowledge will be equaliized in the marketplace.
And that I suggest is the most important thing to happen in computing in the next 30 years.
AIK
The Morality of Bartleby Scivener is absent.
It is unlikely that more people as a percent of population will end up flipping burgers as a result of technical advances - in fact the opposite is much more likely to be true - as McDonalds is already emplementing automated drink machines, and I think a machine has been made that cooks and dispenses decent fries.
The real question is what excatly happens when we resolve the major cost centers in our current economic state.
I suggested that major cost centers include lawyering and doctoring - not in their entirety, but as a good place to start looking.
ironically garbage collection is quite cheap - as automating manual labor is not half so valuable as automating dangerous or expensive labour.
Police robots are an obvious exammple as are UAVs
But what happens when people agree to resolve their differeances by submitting their complaint in the form of an Ask Slashdot question, and being bound by the conclusion of the highest ranking opinion? (we would have to release the 5 cap)
What happens when we take the raw data from double blind studies and then allow patients to enter their own experiences as factors into the OLAP dimensions and output the quantitative answer - asprin - reduce risk by 20% - cost 5cents.
Midolanilin - reduce symptoms in 46% of patients - cost $45 bucks.
Hyprobarbicane - reduce symtom in 35% of patients.
Etc
AIK
Though aspects of both are reducable to programs e.g.,
I'm not implying that statistical analysis would replace trained professions per se.
I am suggesting however that GROUPS of people properly vetted by a turing test and linked by an algorithmic paradigm (not completely unlike slashdot) could resolve complex questions less expensively and faster with as or more consistent results.
In the end - a lot of law boils down to a selfselected panel of 12 unemployed morons.
As for medicine - sure a great deal of medicine - as a great deal of car manufacturing is outside the scope of automation - but a goodly portion is susceptible to the cost advantages and direct feedback of a statistical engine.
I would hope that in reducing a great deal of "the Practice" to automation - we could afford more experimentation, invention and so on.
Its interesting that a lot of medical experimentation is done by Undoctors - Dean Kamen - not to belabour the point = but I think her made his money inventing a medical device - and is not a doctor.
My philosophy suggests that "trained professionals" artificiallly inflate the cost of living for "untrained professionals" and that this effect is always ripe for the arbitrage of automation.
(or outsourcing - or -legislation - or)
AIK
I think we can agree that computers - or technology in general replaces workers.
I remember Arnold B Scrivener - the story of a scrivener (hand copier) left useless by the invention of the typewritter.
So robotics are edging out industrial line mechanics.
I suggest that good software will soon be edging out intellecual translators - the people who speak in professional languages because the "rest of us don't understand" like Lawyers for example.
even doctors - essentially translate a list of complaints into a latin based "syndrome" and cross referance the necessary chemistry.
Politicians are necessary in order to facilitate "groupthink" - but computers could enable large groups to communicate and express agraggated (sic) opinion without the need for an intermediary.
So the issue of shape and size is pedantic - the question is how will technology change the balance of power between segment of society with variant skill sets?
AIK
Another Point - as long as computers are sold in the same room as large screen TVs with booming surround sound (in 24hr demo mode of course) The relatively inert sound from a computer is not likely to strike the consumer at the point of purchase.
The probleem of cooling Micros is that the heat is quite centralized.
A large slow fan would as you suggest move the same air - but it would fail to produce the airspeed neccessary in a finite location.
The problem is primarily economic.
power supplies have been engineered by cost to such a point that any alternative tends to be much more expensive - because it loses the advantage of low cost design AND the advantage of high scale production at the same time.
Likewise motherboards - which if they were designed in an aerodynamic case COULD use less cooling - simply don't because the motherboard would them be a custom design and less suitable for a mass production.
The issue then is really one of consumer awareness. If the TV add with Steven saying "Mrs. Mclehattle is getting a QUIET DELL" doesn't move people as much as the "more for less" slogan - the mass market isn't likely to shift off of dirt cheap mode.
Which in final analysis suggests that noise control by and large will be a user level customization - until moore's law renders a useful machine without the need for cooling - which is quite predictable given there are solid state models on the market now with higher speeds than the first pentium.
AIK
you gotta figure about two weeks until the girl at the sign-in counter at gold's gym ask for your street address and "permission to do a street address verification" which is standard for all new members - just like the SS number and bank account routing number please.
Laptops are delicate and easy to steal. If you have one outside your fortress - you are shackled to the thing. You cannot put it down - check it - put it in overhead storage, or under the table.
In public places it will evaporate faster than spilled vodka.
Travellers want to carry less of the computer and borrow a big display and keyboard at the hotel destination if necessary.
You can give a presentation from a small box with a big HD.
You can get email on a small box with a small display.
You could edit / practice - even give your presentation at the hotel by connecting to the TV.
you can check the keyboard in luggage.
Here's an idea for small screen - big results:
Since most of the screen is options and button which you rarely use. Create a virtual screen in which the edges are condensed or compressed. The scroll bars would be very narrow, the title bar would be a thin blue line - which would stretch as your curser approached.
Then you would feel pretty comfortable on a small screen
AIK
No - the Hard Disk in the end is what makes the thing valuable.
People who do real work need access to large stores of data - without the cost of parsing what to bring and not.
I'm going somewhere - I bring a. My Laptop or B. My PDA-HD with a verbatim copy of "My Docs" folder.
Do I need everything? No.
But Do I have the time to go through everything and sort out what is it I don't need?
What's wanted here is a small screen - which = long life.
Small size - for weight and pocketability
minimal utility - for killing transit time
And Serious storage.
People who have storage know what to do with it. They store pictures, music or both - They Store Source Code.
People who have a PDA - universally say they don't know what to do with it. (Not a flame - if you think so skip this post). Almost everyone has or had one and doesn't use it.
The solution however is the stop and start HD of the iPod. If you can make the HD unnecessary - but available when needed - you can get serious battery life. - combine with a useable screen for personal movies, pictures, notes etc, keyboard with qwery, and option of wifi - you have a useful device.
My prediction - cellphone with 1" 20MB HD shown by the end of the year - available by christmas of next year. (download ringtones and movies)
AIK
Its "Unfair" to attack noncombatants unnecessarily.
The Word "unfair" here implies a fairness construct - but there is no such thing.
Really it amounts to this:
If Iraq and Iran are fighting - the world will stay out until it becomes apparent that one side is substantially "unfair" meaning a threat to polite society.
Whatever else you may think - the Palestinians have lost their cause by resorting to "unfair" tactics.
The world does well to put a price on such unfair tactics - and the price reflects varying degrees of support.
AIK
My Impression has been that patents are the new tragedy of the commons. Everyboody want to condemn the use of patents (or proprietary software / IP in general) while at the same time, they want to use the patent system, or free software too build something they can markeet with competative advantage.
How many OS programmers do you know who aren't trying to figure out how to "embrace and extend" Open Source in a way that creates a saleable product?
If they aren't full time - perhaps - but serious OS'ers need income just like anyone else - and selling free beer doesn't fill bellies.
We need to understand that the issue has more to do with general monopoly exploitation and less to do with the methods used by monopolies to exploit. (Patents - or patent violations)
The important issue is that innovation and patriated wealth comes from small businesses and entrepenuers, while exploitation and expatriated wealth (sheltered offshore accounts - and overwhelming political contributions) come from allowing large corporation to have a disporportiate number of seats at the proverbial table.
AIK
I think you have good points to make.
But the traffic analysis of patents on Slashdot suggests that every patent is a threat to free beer or something like that.
Before you (we) will get a seat at the table where these issues are hammered out - we need to have more than a reactionary basis for a superior position.
AIK
Because time spent on research and developmenet is by definition not spent gaining a profit by direct participation in the market, Innovators are by definition poor.
The rights of innovators to convert the time in R& D to profits later is what motivates (And in all analysis - funds them)
If innovators are not protected from those who keep their powder dry by doing nothing until the idea is created and proven in the marketplace - we will have reeinvented the institution of serfdom.
AIK
Yeah - we don't like it when obvious stuff is patented premptively - but obviously having a Dell simply copy whatever it sees in the market will stifle little guys who say - why invent if the end result is merely to inspire the monsters to clobber you in the market place.
A position of equity which suggests that all people are entitled to equal degrees of intellectual freedoms and rights without regard to the ability to pay for legal protections should be the foundation of thought in IP.
Allowing money to dictate the outcome of IP conflicts is dangerous to the last bastion of American productivity - ideas.
AIK
No - this is a completely valiid point.
The pursuit of any endeavor with potential income is a tax deductable expense.
Eating frogs seems to get high rating on fear factor, thus the $15 dollars i spent at the pet shop to practice is a deductable expense.
I think we should organize more professional competative fields such as to ensure that every action from pooping to scarfing hot dogs is in fact a valid professional pursuit.
AIK
This is an old argument first heard echoing around the halls of international translation.
A Table in English translates to "(a Table)" in German, but the germans have different cultural associations with the word, and thus the word Table in english in fact conjures up completely different connotations, emotions and sensibilities in the english speaker when compared to the word for the same objeect in germany.
(Not my argument - a paraphrase of classical translation pedogogy)
What we have here is a translation between base 10 for humans and base 2 for bounded arrays.
Most people use arabic notation, but in fact store and think of large numbers in base 10 scientific notation. We are essentially zero-counters when it comes to large numbers.
Computers on the other hand are first binary, and secondly store numbers in multidimentional arrays. They are not zero counters, and do not favor round numbers. Generally computers favor memory blocks which are bounded by n dimensions each of which is a exponent of 2.
All thiis to get back to the main point.
The limitations of translation ensures one will never be able to express computer number comfortable in english - and thus the attempt should be governed by the law of diminishing returns.
AIK
Is a Troll when you explore the merits of the unpopular party?
If so then I beleieve we have of a dialogue here and merely a monologue.
The essense of a discussion is tolerance for divergent points of view.
I think a troll is a farce wherein the author presumes upon the innocence of the audience by plying a hypothetical and radical position as if it were his own ostensibly to force others to make the obvious corrections.
This is my own position. I really believe she MAY have a valid interest in preserving the scientific meaning of this particular word. (She also may not) but I don't discount the idea on its face.
AIK
Look - not to be argumentative,
But IF gay or fag where words with some kind of material value ie . . . commercial, scientific or personal worth - and the term were used by a high value target - such as a TV reporter, competitor, or website then there would be some recourse available.
but common words do get co-opted and without a party to defend the erosion of meaning - language simply shifts.
In this case - there is someone to defend the meaning of the word - this is hardly the first time.
At one time it was common to say Skillsaw and mean a circular saw - so ubiquitous was the name given by Skill to their invention.
But they defended the name and we have moved on to a more appropriate generic name for the device.
AIK
This is a bit like a kleenex maker trying to preserve itself from the obsolescence of their own success.
Its a complicated phenome and the regular "patents are evil" rountine may not do it suffecient justice.
AIK
You could be right - I don't know that shes not mony grubbing.
My point is simply that as google because more dominant in the mindshare of the world - this Googol word is going to be buried as to its initial definition.
She has the right to try to preserve it.'
AIK