Quelque chose est ironique quand sa signification réelle est l'opposé de sa signification prévue.
(Thank god for babelfish, eh?)
Actually, the word is nearly identical in french and english, as you were able to see for yourself. And, despite what you mistakenly believe, I understand the word well enough to know that there are more than one precise meanings. Indeed, "irony" can also mean "incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result", i.e. "you would expect that guns would be blamed first, since they're the obvious vector of such violent acts, but instead it's video games that gets the bad rep." That was the intended meaning, and therefore my choice of the word was justified. Hint: Merriam-Webster gives "sarcastic" as a synonym for "ironic".
I didn't say guns never get any bad press. You just assumed I did. I said that games are "quick to get the bad press." In other words, video games (and The Matrix, one of the foremost movies issued directly from the video game culture) get blamed first. Then, after a few days, it will probably be music (let's hope they didn't listen to Marilyn Manson...). Then, perhaps, it will be guns - or rather, the parent's irresponsible attitude towards gun ownership. And finally, almost never, it will be the culture of exclusion that is prevalent in so many American schools.
And to answer your oh-so-polite query, I live in Canada. What's that got to do with anything? Don't you know your Big Media is overflowin' all over the planet? In Canada, we know more of what's happening in the States than what's happening at the other end of the country (granted, it's a pretty big country). I guess we have that advantage over you, AC...
Ouch! Mod this up as "insightful", not funny! I mean, wait until they try to tie the first killing spree to AA!
Yes, he was a quiet kid, kept to himself, played a green beret captain in the U.S. Army on the Internet...
I hear America's Army is a great game, but I won't play it until there's a mod that lets me go AWOL in the jungle of southeast asia, become a living god to a tribe of natives, build up my own private army and keep a freaked-out photographer as court jester...
If find it highly ironic that Video Games are quick to get the blame, while no one cares to consider that having guns and weapons close at hand might also make good scapegoats...only in America!
Now, please, before you get all second-amendment on me: this is not intended to start a flame war over your "right to bear arms" - just a reflection on the fact that video games are always quick to get the bad press. Probably because the sound-bite media is always eager to find simple explanations to complex problems.
I don't know...I do find the argument that SCO continued to distribute Linux after they knew (and, in fact, announced) that allegedly infringing code was in it to be quite compelling. The GPL is not just there for show, it is a license and as such is based on the same law as the one that makes other software licenses valid.
Now, SCO's argument is that even if they did distribute Linux, they weren't aware of their code allegedly being in Linux. However, and this is important, they continued to distribute it afterward - and not a day or two, but a full month after disclosure. In other words, they knowingly distributed the offending code under the GPL, therefore releasing it to the Linux community. Note that this has, in fact, not much to do with the lawsuit against IBM, which is a breach of contract suit. SCO seems to have acknowledged that they can't legally sue Linux companies, which would be a violation of the GPL, and therefore Linux will be unaffected even if SCO wins against IBM. In other words, they're saying "the genie's out of the bottle, we can't put it back in, but at least we'll sue the one who let it out." That's how I read it, anyway. IANAL.
Okay, I re-read my post and realized that I was a bit ambiguous. What I meant to say is that they get a cut from every Xbox game sold. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
MS can still add yours to the tally, then rack in the licensing fees.
Actually, MS gets a cut off of every Xbox copy sold. They don't "charge" developers to make game for them. So selling more consoles actually makes them lose more money - they make the money off of the games (think of it as a very expensive razor...)
We don't disagree - I also think that it's more important to have food, shelter, healthcare and power than pedal-powered Internet. But it serves a purpose, and it was what the Jhai Foundation could offer. In any case, the Laotian villagers seem happy. I have to say, I've always been amazed at how quickly the Internet has caught on in developing countries (mostly because of e-mail, really - after all, it offers quick communications often at a lesser cost than the telephone, especially when contacting family members overseas). I remember being in India 15 years ago, and seeing photos a friend took of some of the same places I visited then as the look now: "Internet cafes" everywhere!
Er...save your kudos, friend. They're not advocating "freer" licenses - they're trying to push proprietary alternatives.
In any case, because they're taxpayer dollars, I think they should definitely go with free software. Since the govt. is unlikely to be a software distributor, there's no problem with using the GPL (or BSD licenses, for that matter).
Communication is an important aspect of being part of the international community. Obviously, no one can bring peace and prosperity all in one package. What's important is that those who want to help do their little part, according to their ability.
I see much irony coming from you, but ask yourself: have you done your part?
Obviously we're of a different opinion on this. BTW, 50 to 60 thousands falls in the range between 10 and hundred thousand, so what's your point? I think you pulled that one-third/two-third figure out of your ass, though - typical for apologists of the war in southeast asia. Since you must have serious sources, why don't you give a link for them? Oh, and "some rightwing website" won't do...
"Subjugated" the south? The south supported the Viet-Cong, not the puppet regime propped up by the U.S. Nice try rewriting history - or should I say, repeating the official line the U.S. government back in those days kept repeating. Who are you, a former member of the Lyndon Johnson cabinet? Even McNamara now concedes that the war was a mistake - get over it!
It wasn't a revoulation or a war of liberation, it was a military conquest by an expanionist power in Hanoi.
Yeah, sure. Fighting to kick out a foreing invader who had no business in that part of the world is a "military conquest by an expansionist power." I bet you believed Bush when he said that he had "solid proof" that Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs ready to be used at any moment!
The american right-winger's first commendment: never admit when you're country's been wrong. The second one: find a way to blame everything on those "whining liberals." The third one: the end justifies the means, even if the means require the slaughter of thousands of innocents. The fourth one: the market is king, and governments should never interfere, except of course when it comes to military spending. The fifth one: when in doubt, blame Clinton. The sixth one: whatever happens, there is no greenhouse effect. The seventh one: even though they've been robbed of a future for 35 years, Palestinians are responsible for their own plight, and Israel must not be criticizes. The eigth one: always say that the media is liberal, even though it's not true. The ninth one: retort to personal attacks when facts aren't with you. The tenth one: if all fails, accuse opponents of being anti-american.
Support for the Viet Cong in the South during the war was so high that the U.S. had to bomb the countryside in order to provoke mass exodus towards refugee camps, where contacts between the general populace and the "enemy" were much more difficult.
And I can no longer talk to S Vietnamese people, since Viet-Nam is now united. We are talking about what was the situation during the war, not what it is now. Please pay attention.
Tens, if not hundred of thousands of Laotian civilians were killed in U.S. bombing runs over Laos. I'll bet ya they weren't all right on the Ho Chi Minh trail, whose strategic importance was later minimized by the U.S. government itself. You may think that thousans upon thousands of civilian killed, entire communities being wiped out by carpet bombing, doesn't have an effect on a country's development. I tend to disagree, and so do most sensible people.
The U.S. "war effort" in SE Asia was a misguided and unjust colonial war, perhaps one of the last of its kind. I find it puzzling that some people still try to defend it. The "red scare" arguments can't even be used, since it's now generally accepted that the main reason that Ho Chi Minh went Communist is that the U.S. sided with France.
This was not a communist revolution, it was a war of liberation for the Viet-cong. The only reason they went for communist support is that these were the only one who would help them. This is why the vietnames people overwhelmingly supported the North, even in the South, a fact that the U.S. failed to understand and which led to its resounding (and costly) defeat.
It's also one of the poorest. A good case can be made that if the country hadn't been bombed back to the stone age by the U.S. during the Vietnam War (for no really good reason, either, since the U.S. lost anyway), then perhaps they'd have a nicer country to live in. War and widespread destruction will damage a country's social fabric, you know...that kind of environment can sometimes be good breeding grounds for totalitarian regimes.
I do hope that Laos is getting a good deal out of this, but I also hope that Laotians in general will benefit from some of it.
In the meantime, check out the Jhai foundation, they do some pretty good stuff. The chair of the Jhai foundation actually participated as part of a bomber crew during the Vietnam war. Having brought pain to this part of the world, he now wants to make amends by bringing peace and the internet to Loatian villagers. He's also part of Veterans for Peace and a really decent guy.
In any case, it'd be some sweet irony that one of the poorest nations on Earth would get some money for selling TLDs to one of the richiest part of the world...:-)
Yes, of course. But since ad revenue is only part of the total income for the network, then it is less vulnerable to that kind of interference. Add to that the very independent nature of the CBC's news service (and its french-language counterpart, Radio-Canada), and you have some of the finest TV journalism in the world.
"There are plenty of news networks out there that are as impartial as the BBC (the BBC is not 100% impartial) that are not funded by a licence fee.
Name one."
The CBC in Canada - altough it does get some of its financing from general income taxes, in addition to ad revenue.
Re:ESR is just as bad, if not worse
on
OSI vs SCO
·
· Score: 1
However, as I understand it, IBM is looking into getting him as an expert witness in the case. As someone who has been around UNIX and free/open source software for a long while, it's only natural that he should take a strong stance on this. As it stands, his rebuttal seems to be rock-solid. I have yet to read a convincing counter-rebuttal...
Of course, the funny thing with all this is that those idiots who first thought up of "freedom fries" and "freedom toast" have basically introduced a "France == Freedom" meme into the national psyche. (Which is fitting, since it is part of the national motto: Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité)
You're right, of course. History is too often written by the victors. I agree with you that school textbooks are not the ideal place to learn about history - one is much better served in this regard by reading from a variety of sources. There are some events that are more clear-cut than others, though. The burning of the Montreal parliament is one of those - there is ample historical material, from a variety of sources, to be able to reconstitute the events.
The case of Louis Riel - like the man himself - is much more complex. I guess he was both a traitor and a hero, a brillant leader and a loony. Again, one is best informed by reading up on a variety of sources on the subject.
Slashdot Mirror
Please go and argue with www.m-w.com, I'm quite bored with this discussion:
Main Entry: irony
3 a (1) : incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result.
Quelque chose est ironique quand sa signification réelle est l'opposé de sa signification prévue.
(Thank god for babelfish, eh?)
Actually, the word is nearly identical in french and english, as you were able to see for yourself. And, despite what you mistakenly believe, I understand the word well enough to know that there are more than one precise meanings. Indeed, "irony" can also mean "incongruity between the actual result of a sequence of events and the normal or expected result", i.e. "you would expect that guns would be blamed first, since they're the obvious vector of such violent acts, but instead it's video games that gets the bad rep." That was the intended meaning, and therefore my choice of the word was justified. Hint: Merriam-Webster gives "sarcastic" as a synonym for "ironic".
Bonne fin de soirée, dude.
As English is my second language, please address all linguistic criticism to me in french (my native tongue).
So, why isn't it ironic? In french please.
Dude,
I didn't say guns never get any bad press. You just assumed I did. I said that games are "quick to get the bad press." In other words, video games (and The Matrix, one of the foremost movies issued directly from the video game culture) get blamed first. Then, after a few days, it will probably be music (let's hope they didn't listen to Marilyn Manson...). Then, perhaps, it will be guns - or rather, the parent's irresponsible attitude towards gun ownership. And finally, almost never, it will be the culture of exclusion that is prevalent in so many American schools.
And to answer your oh-so-polite query, I live in Canada. What's that got to do with anything? Don't you know your Big Media is overflowin' all over the planet? In Canada, we know more of what's happening in the States than what's happening at the other end of the country (granted, it's a pretty big country). I guess we have that advantage over you, AC...
Ouch! Mod this up as "insightful", not funny! I mean, wait until they try to tie the first killing spree to AA!
Yes, he was a quiet kid, kept to himself, played a green beret captain in the U.S. Army on the Internet...
I hear America's Army is a great game, but I won't play it until there's a mod that lets me go AWOL in the jungle of southeast asia, become a living god to a tribe of natives, build up my own private army and keep a freaked-out photographer as court jester...
If find it highly ironic that Video Games are quick to get the blame, while no one cares to consider that having guns and weapons close at hand might also make good scapegoats...only in America!
Now, please, before you get all second-amendment on me: this is not intended to start a flame war over your "right to bear arms" - just a reflection on the fact that video games are always quick to get the bad press. Probably because the sound-bite media is always eager to find simple explanations to complex problems.
Very interesting. I stand enlightened.
I don't know...I do find the argument that SCO continued to distribute Linux after they knew (and, in fact, announced) that allegedly infringing code was in it to be quite compelling. The GPL is not just there for show, it is a license and as such is based on the same law as the one that makes other software licenses valid.
Now, SCO's argument is that even if they did distribute Linux, they weren't aware of their code allegedly being in Linux. However, and this is important, they continued to distribute it afterward - and not a day or two, but a full month after disclosure. In other words, they knowingly distributed the offending code under the GPL, therefore releasing it to the Linux community. Note that this has, in fact, not much to do with the lawsuit against IBM, which is a breach of contract suit. SCO seems to have acknowledged that they can't legally sue Linux companies, which would be a violation of the GPL, and therefore Linux will be unaffected even if SCO wins against IBM. In other words, they're saying "the genie's out of the bottle, we can't put it back in, but at least we'll sue the one who let it out." That's how I read it, anyway. IANAL.
Okay, I re-read my post and realized that I was a bit ambiguous. What I meant to say is that they get a cut from every Xbox game sold. Sorry if I wasn't clear.
MS can still add yours to the tally, then rack in the licensing fees.
Actually, MS gets a cut off of every Xbox copy sold. They don't "charge" developers to make game for them. So selling more consoles actually makes them lose more money - they make the money off of the games (think of it as a very expensive razor...)
Check out "In Nomine", published by Steve Jackson Games...
We don't disagree - I also think that it's more important to have food, shelter, healthcare and power than pedal-powered Internet. But it serves a purpose, and it was what the Jhai Foundation could offer. In any case, the Laotian villagers seem happy. I have to say, I've always been amazed at how quickly the Internet has caught on in developing countries (mostly because of e-mail, really - after all, it offers quick communications often at a lesser cost than the telephone, especially when contacting family members overseas). I remember being in India 15 years ago, and seeing photos a friend took of some of the same places I visited then as the look now: "Internet cafes" everywhere!
Er...save your kudos, friend. They're not advocating "freer" licenses - they're trying to push proprietary alternatives.
In any case, because they're taxpayer dollars, I think they should definitely go with free software. Since the govt. is unlikely to be a software distributor, there's no problem with using the GPL (or BSD licenses, for that matter).
Communication is an important aspect of being part of the international community. Obviously, no one can bring peace and prosperity all in one package. What's important is that those who want to help do their little part, according to their ability.
I see much irony coming from you, but ask yourself: have you done your part?
Careful now, or SCO might sue you for not caring enough about it! ;-)
Actually, not to nitpick, but the "G" stands for "General". The GPL is often called the "GNU General Public Licence."
Obviously we're of a different opinion on this. BTW, 50 to 60 thousands falls in the range between 10 and hundred thousand, so what's your point? I think you pulled that one-third/two-third figure out of your ass, though - typical for apologists of the war in southeast asia. Since you must have serious sources, why don't you give a link for them? Oh, and "some rightwing website" won't do...
"Subjugated" the south? The south supported the Viet-Cong, not the puppet regime propped up by the U.S. Nice try rewriting history - or should I say, repeating the official line the U.S. government back in those days kept repeating. Who are you, a former member of the Lyndon Johnson cabinet? Even McNamara now concedes that the war was a mistake - get over it!
It wasn't a revoulation or a war of liberation, it was a military conquest by an expanionist power in Hanoi.
Yeah, sure. Fighting to kick out a foreing invader who had no business in that part of the world is a "military conquest by an expansionist power." I bet you believed Bush when he said that he had "solid proof" that Saddam had stockpiles of WMDs ready to be used at any moment!
The american right-winger's first commendment: never admit when you're country's been wrong. The second one: find a way to blame everything on those "whining liberals." The third one: the end justifies the means, even if the means require the slaughter of thousands of innocents. The fourth one: the market is king, and governments should never interfere, except of course when it comes to military spending. The fifth one: when in doubt, blame Clinton. The sixth one: whatever happens, there is no greenhouse effect. The seventh one: even though they've been robbed of a future for 35 years, Palestinians are responsible for their own plight, and Israel must not be criticizes. The eigth one: always say that the media is liberal, even though it's not true. The ninth one: retort to personal attacks when facts aren't with you. The tenth one: if all fails, accuse opponents of being anti-american.
Support for the Viet Cong in the South during the war was so high that the U.S. had to bomb the countryside in order to provoke mass exodus towards refugee camps, where contacts between the general populace and the "enemy" were much more difficult. And I can no longer talk to S Vietnamese people, since Viet-Nam is now united. We are talking about what was the situation during the war, not what it is now. Please pay attention.
Tens, if not hundred of thousands of Laotian civilians were killed in U.S. bombing runs over Laos. I'll bet ya they weren't all right on the Ho Chi Minh trail, whose strategic importance was later minimized by the U.S. government itself. You may think that thousans upon thousands of civilian killed, entire communities being wiped out by carpet bombing, doesn't have an effect on a country's development. I tend to disagree, and so do most sensible people.
The U.S. "war effort" in SE Asia was a misguided and unjust colonial war, perhaps one of the last of its kind. I find it puzzling that some people still try to defend it. The "red scare" arguments can't even be used, since it's now generally accepted that the main reason that Ho Chi Minh went Communist is that the U.S. sided with France.
This was not a communist revolution, it was a war of liberation for the Viet-cong. The only reason they went for communist support is that these were the only one who would help them. This is why the vietnames people overwhelmingly supported the North, even in the South, a fact that the U.S. failed to understand and which led to its resounding (and costly) defeat.
It's also one of the poorest. A good case can be made that if the country hadn't been bombed back to the stone age by the U.S. during the Vietnam War (for no really good reason, either, since the U.S. lost anyway), then perhaps they'd have a nicer country to live in. War and widespread destruction will damage a country's social fabric, you know...that kind of environment can sometimes be good breeding grounds for totalitarian regimes.
:-)
I do hope that Laos is getting a good deal out of this, but I also hope that Laotians in general will benefit from some of it.
In the meantime, check out the Jhai foundation, they do some pretty good stuff. The chair of the Jhai foundation actually participated as part of a bomber crew during the Vietnam war. Having brought pain to this part of the world, he now wants to make amends by bringing peace and the internet to Loatian villagers. He's also part of Veterans for Peace and a really decent guy.
In any case, it'd be some sweet irony that one of the poorest nations on Earth would get some money for selling TLDs to one of the richiest part of the world...
Yes, of course. But since ad revenue is only part of the total income for the network, then it is less vulnerable to that kind of interference. Add to that the very independent nature of the CBC's news service (and its french-language counterpart, Radio-Canada), and you have some of the finest TV journalism in the world.
"There are plenty of news networks out there that are as impartial as the BBC (the BBC is not 100% impartial) that are not funded by a licence fee. Name one." The CBC in Canada - altough it does get some of its financing from general income taxes, in addition to ad revenue.
However, as I understand it, IBM is looking into getting him as an expert witness in the case. As someone who has been around UNIX and free/open source software for a long while, it's only natural that he should take a strong stance on this. As it stands, his rebuttal seems to be rock-solid. I have yet to read a convincing counter-rebuttal...
Of course, the funny thing with all this is that those idiots who first thought up of "freedom fries" and "freedom toast" have basically introduced a "France == Freedom" meme into the national psyche. (Which is fitting, since it is part of the national motto: Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité)
You're right, of course. History is too often written by the victors. I agree with you that school textbooks are not the ideal place to learn about history - one is much better served in this regard by reading from a variety of sources. There are some events that are more clear-cut than others, though. The burning of the Montreal parliament is one of those - there is ample historical material, from a variety of sources, to be able to reconstitute the events.
The case of Louis Riel - like the man himself - is much more complex. I guess he was both a traitor and a hero, a brillant leader and a loony. Again, one is best informed by reading up on a variety of sources on the subject.