No, you would say "everybody is here", just like you'd say "he or she is here" but not "they is here". Don't ask me why "everybody" is considered singular;)
How do you compensate someone who is totally lost to their family because they're stuck in the office 7 days a week?
Man, cry me a fucking river. Coal, steel, oil workers. *Those* guys need unions. Those guys give up lungs, give up seeing daylight, for long hours, low pay, and an early death. Technology workers have tremendous leverage (that is, if you are really worth anything, as opposed to some wanker who just impressess non-techies with big words). As somebody said, perhaps we need a technical worker's lobby, to fix up all the fucked up laws created by ignorant politicians. But a union? That is just pushing pansy-assed-ness a bit too far.
Damn, I remember my old transformers. Now those were *real* toys. Not just plastic shite. I remember my wheeljack being made of metal, rubber tires, real damn paint. Hefty. Those were the days.
The catch with this "voting with your wallet" business that free-market zealots are always bandying around is: sucks for you if you don't have any money in your wallet!
Basic human needs and rights should not be voted with money. Although I wouldn't consider utilites a right, they are undoubtably necessary...it is pretty impractical to "opt-out" of using electricity or hot water. When it comes to basic services and facilities all citizens should have access to, the political process *is* the process that should decide these things (however ugly and corrupt it may be -- most often corrupted by big business in the first place).
Main Entry: their
Pronunciation: [th]&r, '[th]er, '[th]ar
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from their, pronoun, from Old Norse theirra, genitive plural demonstrative & personal pronoun; akin to Old English thæt that
Date: 13th century 1: of or relating to them or themselves especially as possessors, agents, or objects of an action <their furniture> <their verses> <their being seen> 2 : his or her : HIS, HER, ITS-- used with an indefinite third person singular antecedent <anyone in their senses -- W. H. Auden> usage see THEY
So if you consider "everybody" to be singular then it seems that at least Mirriam-Webster's agrees that "their" is appropriate usage.
There's nothing like flaming a grammar flamer flaming another grammar flamer for grammar.
Anybody have info on how 2.4 behaves on old/slow machines...say, like a 66 mhz 486? I've been hearing reports that it's "faster" and "better", but there's usually a tradeoff involved.
An "Alternative" that for the most part is bloated with contrived fabricated pop crap. The "real" alternative has escaped to indie, and several other niches. Of course once those sounds become the big thing expect them to make up the largest section in the store.
I think your analogy is messed up. Edison was probably Gates, and Tesla was probably Wozniak or that Flowers guy in WWII that invented the first computer (well, British one at least...shortly before the Neumann bombes/collossus, etc.).
Tesla gets way too little credit. Really, how many times is he mentioned in your average high school American history text book? Yet we fawn over Edison, who may have been smart, but was greedy, corrupt, and basically a mean person. Alas, that is usually the way it goes with American history.
Yeah, but Republicans (and Democrats) are basically corporate parties. What does it matter to *them* if they reduce government control? It just means they'll have less restrictions in going about making money, polluting, exploiting the poor, etc., generally things that government throttles. They benefit by reducing government control. At least the Democrats pretend to be socially aware and caring.
For the record I voted for Nader, because I think the Democratic and Republican parties are both a bunch of self-serving bastards;)
So once again, I call for the actual criminal act to be illegal and the posession of the images to be legal.
I'm sure they'll do that...right after they declare possession of crack and pcp legal, but its use illegal.
I think the illegality of (real) kiddie porn is based on the fact that, ipso facto, it exploits children. On the other hand, drugs don't really hurt anyone but *yourself* (victimless). But yeah, they should really draw the line at real kiddie porn (where it is obvious some child has been exploited) and fake kiddie porn, which is just really sick, but cannot be tied directly to some exploitation.
It seems to me that we risk very little if recognize there is a problem, and start polluting less, wasting less, and converting to cleaner energy sources. How can you possibly go wrong with that? Even if it is unnecessary, how is that possibly bad?
On the other hand, if we totally disregard this, the risk is much much much larger. Even if long term affects of pollution are disproven, there are still *plenty* of awful short term affects we live with. How could cleaning up our act possibly be a bad thing?
I'd have to disagree a bit. *Weather* might be chaotic. But climate usually isn't. I mean, the equator isn't going to become an arctic climate over night. We can track trends over hundreds and thousands of years, accross ice ages, etc.
The bottom line is: 1) if we do nothing, we can get screwed pretty big 2) if we do *something*, the only risk is that we have "unnecessarily" forced ourselves to be less wasteful, more efficient, etc. How could that *possibly* be a bad thing?
Our only way out of this mess is to consume less energy. Period.
CLAP. CLAP. CLAP.
First we need to stop wasting so much. After we reduce energy waste, then other forms of energy generation might just be feasible. I mean, if the transit systems were better and people used them more instead of cruising around in their gas-chugging Ford Exorbitants, then all of a sudden electric or hybrid motors in busses seems like a much better idea.
I just cannot believe the mentality of Bush, and co., who think that the solution to our overuse of a rare and finite amount of oil, is to go and rip up Alaska for some temporary relief (20 years supply! 20 years is nothing!).
Warning: if your parents brought you to one of those police fingerprint days when you are a kid, your fingerprints are *already* on record. The whole point (or so it seems), is that if you're abducted as a kiddie, etc., that they can find you more easily because they have your fingerprints on record.
You might want to look into one of those plastic keyboard covers if you are considering keeping your fingertip skin sliced off...
Exactly the post I was going to make. What the hell is so *great* about HDTV anyway! Yay, I get to watch more mindless drivel with - *higher definition*. Joy! I watch TV basically for Fox Sundays and Tuesdays, and the Lehrer show on PBS, and if I can catch a Nova once in a while, but I never know when they're on. Everything else is pretty much a vast wasteland of utter rotting crap. The government should support a bill that makes normal TVs, as they are, MORE expensive so people watch them less.
I now send the postage-page envelopes back from junk mailers. Empty. Eat that! 30 cents out of your pocket! Yeah!
If the postage was *already* paid, the only thing you are costing them is the annoyance of having to open your worthless mail (AFAIK, they pay whether or not you actually use the prepaid envelope). Of course this, in itself, is probably worth it. However, I would feel sorry for the poor postal employees that now have to send junk mail *both* ways.
Prof. John Frink: "Well, as any real geek can tell <glavin> this movie is highly overrated...what with the self-referential cliches <glavin> and the inaccurate depiction of programmers, and the clacking and clicking, and the spying, and the killing, oh the killing! <Glavin>!"
Comic Book Guy: "I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, a DIVxed copy of which I downloaded a week before it was released to theaters, from alt dot nerd dot obsessive."
Pedro: "esta película lastima mi cerebro!"
Burns: "Exxxxcellent. Why, you know, in this day and age it is so rare to see the head of a giant corporation portrayed in such an honest and favorable manner."
Lisa: "Obviously this is just more pop-culture tripe from Hollywood, and just another weak attempt to appeal to geeks."
Slashdot Mirror
Would you say "everybody are here?"
;)
No, you would say "everybody is here", just like you'd say "he or she is here" but not "they is here". Don't ask me why "everybody" is considered singular
How do you compensate someone who is totally lost to their family because they're stuck in the office 7 days a week?
Man, cry me a fucking river. Coal, steel, oil workers. *Those* guys need unions. Those guys give up lungs, give up seeing daylight, for long hours, low pay, and an early death. Technology workers have tremendous leverage (that is, if you are really worth anything, as opposed to some wanker who just impressess non-techies with big words). As somebody said, perhaps we need a technical worker's lobby, to fix up all the fucked up laws created by ignorant politicians. But a union? That is just pushing pansy-assed-ness a bit too far.
Damn, I remember my old transformers. Now those were *real* toys. Not just plastic shite. I remember my wheeljack being made of metal, rubber tires, real damn paint. Hefty. Those were the days.
But how would gravity be handled? Would you merely "stick" to the outside of the ship? How would you get in the ship? Would you just float around?
Yeah, too bad...it was going to be powered by the environmentally clean hot air from flamers and trolls...
It will let them VOTE WITH THEIR WALLETS.
The catch with this "voting with your wallet" business that free-market zealots are always bandying around is: sucks for you if you don't have any money in your wallet!
Basic human needs and rights should not be voted with money. Although I wouldn't consider utilites a right, they are undoubtably necessary...it is pretty impractical to "opt-out" of using electricity or hot water. When it comes to basic services and facilities all citizens should have access to, the political process *is* the process that should decide these things (however ugly and corrupt it may be -- most often corrupted by big business in the first place).
Ahem!:
: of or relating to them or themselves especially as possessors, agents, or objects of an action <their furniture> <their verses> <their being seen>
Main Entry: their
Pronunciation: [th]&r, '[th]er, '[th]ar
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from their, pronoun, from Old Norse theirra, genitive plural demonstrative & personal pronoun; akin to Old English thæt that
Date: 13th century
1
2 : his or her : HIS, HER, ITS-- used with an indefinite third person singular antecedent <anyone in their senses -- W. H. Auden>
usage see THEY
So if you consider "everybody" to be singular then it seems that at least Mirriam-Webster's agrees that "their" is appropriate usage.
There's nothing like flaming a grammar flamer flaming another grammar flamer for grammar.
Anybody have info on how 2.4 behaves on old/slow machines...say, like a 66 mhz 486? I've been hearing reports that it's "faster" and "better", but there's usually a tradeoff involved.
whereas 'it's' is the contraction of 'it is' you where looking for.
Perhaps you mean:
"...you were looking for"
?
An "Alternative" that for the most part is bloated with contrived fabricated pop crap. The "real" alternative has escaped to indie, and several other niches. Of course once those sounds become the big thing expect them to make up the largest section in the store.
The word of the day is: co-option
I think your analogy is messed up. Edison was probably Gates, and Tesla was probably Wozniak or that Flowers guy in WWII that invented the first computer (well, British one at least...shortly before the Neumann bombes/collossus, etc.).
Tesla gets way too little credit. Really, how many times is he mentioned in your average high school American history text book? Yet we fawn over Edison, who may have been smart, but was greedy, corrupt, and basically a mean person. Alas, that is usually the way it goes with American history.
I've hit the +50 karma cap. Does that mean I won?
No, it means you, like myself, now can feel free to post drivel because there is no negative feedback! Yay! What a great system!
(ex- ~150 karma)
Yeah, but Republicans (and Democrats) are basically corporate parties. What does it matter to *them* if they reduce government control? It just means they'll have less restrictions in going about making money, polluting, exploiting the poor, etc., generally things that government throttles. They benefit by reducing government control. At least the Democrats pretend to be socially aware and caring.
;)
For the record I voted for Nader, because I think the Democratic and Republican parties are both a bunch of self-serving bastards
So once again, I call for the actual criminal act to be illegal and the posession of the images to be legal.
I'm sure they'll do that...right after they declare possession of crack and pcp legal, but its use illegal.
I think the illegality of (real) kiddie porn is based on the fact that, ipso facto, it exploits children. On the other hand, drugs don't really hurt anyone but *yourself* (victimless). But yeah, they should really draw the line at real kiddie porn (where it is obvious some child has been exploited) and fake kiddie porn, which is just really sick, but cannot be tied directly to some exploitation.
In light of Katz's article, I wonder what effect Bush will have on this...
It seems to me that we risk very little if recognize there is a problem, and start polluting less, wasting less, and converting to cleaner energy sources. How can you possibly go wrong with that? Even if it is unnecessary, how is that possibly bad?
On the other hand, if we totally disregard this, the risk is much much much larger. Even if long term affects of pollution are disproven, there are still *plenty* of awful short term affects we live with. How could cleaning up our act possibly be a bad thing?
The climate is a chaotic system
I'd have to disagree a bit. *Weather* might be chaotic. But climate usually isn't. I mean, the equator isn't going to become an arctic climate over night. We can track trends over hundreds and thousands of years, accross ice ages, etc.
The bottom line is: 1) if we do nothing, we can get screwed pretty big 2) if we do *something*, the only risk is that we have "unnecessarily" forced ourselves to be less wasteful, more efficient, etc. How could that *possibly* be a bad thing?
Our only way out of this mess is to consume less energy. Period.
CLAP. CLAP. CLAP.
First we need to stop wasting so much. After we reduce energy waste, then other forms of energy generation might just be feasible. I mean, if the transit systems were better and people used them more instead of cruising around in their gas-chugging Ford Exorbitants, then all of a sudden electric or hybrid motors in busses seems like a much better idea.
I just cannot believe the mentality of Bush, and co., who think that the solution to our overuse of a rare and finite amount of oil, is to go and rip up Alaska for some temporary relief (20 years supply! 20 years is nothing!).
So what *is* EVAS? I take it it is not replacing X? But instead some intermediate library between the application and X? Is this correct?
Warning: if your parents brought you to one of those police fingerprint days when you are a kid, your fingerprints are *already* on record. The whole point (or so it seems), is that if you're abducted as a kiddie, etc., that they can find you more easily because they have your fingerprints on record.
You might want to look into one of those plastic keyboard covers if you are considering keeping your fingertip skin sliced off...
Exactly the post I was going to make. What the hell is so *great* about HDTV anyway! Yay, I get to watch more mindless drivel with - *higher definition*. Joy! I watch TV basically for Fox Sundays and Tuesdays, and the Lehrer show on PBS, and if I can catch a Nova once in a while, but I never know when they're on. Everything else is pretty much a vast wasteland of utter rotting crap. The government should support a bill that makes normal TVs, as they are, MORE expensive so people watch them less.
Or maybe put fortune cookie fortunes in them...
Man, I have to find a site to purchase those in bulk...
Or how about just stuffing them with tidbits of garbage? Then you don't have to take out your trash as often ;)
I now send the postage-page envelopes back from junk mailers. Empty. Eat that! 30 cents out of your pocket! Yeah!
If the postage was *already* paid, the only thing you are costing them is the annoyance of having to open your worthless mail (AFAIK, they pay whether or not you actually use the prepaid envelope). Of course this, in itself, is probably worth it. However, I would feel sorry for the poor postal employees that now have to send junk mail *both* ways.
Comments from other critics:
Prof. John Frink: "Well, as any real geek can tell <glavin> this movie is highly overrated...what with the self-referential cliches <glavin> and the inaccurate depiction of programmers, and the clacking and clicking, and the spying, and the killing, oh the killing! <Glavin>!"
Comic Book Guy: "I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, a DIVxed copy of which I downloaded a week before it was released to theaters, from alt dot nerd dot obsessive."
Pedro: "esta película lastima mi cerebro!"
Burns: "Exxxxcellent. Why, you know, in this day and age it is so rare to see the head of a giant corporation portrayed in such an honest and favorable manner."
Lisa: "Obviously this is just more pop-culture tripe from Hollywood, and just another weak attempt to appeal to geeks."