I'm not sure I've ever captured a fully meaning. What do they look like?
I've never needed to use diagrams in personal notes. Once I 'get' the concept or visual then my text description is enough to recall it.
I realize other people think more visually and you could easily use a simple graphical program for diagrams or stick with pencil and paper for that. Cursive text and pencil and paper aren't mutually inclusive. Just because you type the text doesn't mean you have to abandon paper altogether if that is what you find comfortable. Number your diagrams with print and reference them at the appropriate points in your notes. You can even scan them in later.
Diagrams and pictures are (mostly) innately clear to anyone versed in the subject matter. Nobody is going to have trouble reading your sketch of a living room, particularly with clear block letter labels indicating each piece of furniture.
I can't tell is that a convoluted way of saying resume, cover letter, or a letter of recommendation? In any of those cases typing would be more appropriate than writing by hand. An exception might be the signature on the letter.
The only time I know of that it makes sense to send an awkward handwritten letter is when sending a letter to a congress critter. The myth is that they pay more attention when you take the time and effort to write the letter by hand. The reality is that no matter what form of communication you send you get a form letter back on that particular topic or issue and your opinion is completely ignored. Maybe because the elections are rigged. *shrugs*
Typing and laptop is faster and more effective than writing. If its short enough that its actually more convenient to write by hand then its short enough to print in legible block letters.
When I ask if someone speaks greek I'm referring to a sex act, not a language. I find greek to be a very important skill in a partner whether we interact for a night or a lifetime.
As for the languages.. I don't really see the point in having more than one. Just integrate the words and concepts that better expressed in other languages into English, call it Shaitanese in honor of the brilliant thinker who proposed this idea, and phase everything else out. It might take time to move to it like it takes time to move to the metric system but there is certainly no need to teach the old languages in school. People will learn them at home, teach Shaitanese in school and educate in Shaitanese from thereon in. Language is not part of culture, its a communication device and in a global society a global language is needed.
I find even those old documents to be difficult to read. Most 'neat' cursive is either pigeon scratch where lower case letters are hard to distinguish or bubbly where every letter is difficult to interpret. I've never seen cursive that wasn't produced by a computer font that was legible enough to read fluidly without any pauses or hesitations.
Print, particularly if you omit the lowercase letters on the hand is very legible even if written by a child. If you are recording more than a couple lines a computer is a better choice anyway.
Having moved around ALOT as a child I had the benefit of seeing lots of cursive charts and even the charts varied on the details of how to form letters.
Increasingly fine manual dexterity simply isn't needed though. Your brain has a fixed capacity and the ability to analyze and interpret the meaning of a new interface of buttons or a form of code is probably more useful filler than manual dexterity.
Like cursive, its only a problem because it doesn't need solved. People aren't skilled with cursive because they aren't using it. Fortunately, nobody is using cursive because they have no need of it and thus no need of the skill.
Most tasks requiring manual dexterity are being replaced by computer controlled system that are far more accurate than a trained human hand or eye. I mean really, a $5000 mechanical watch is nice for nostalgia and overpriced status symbols but a $5 almost entirely computer designed and manufactured digital timex is by far a superior timepiece in terms of utility.
Your father was probably in the military right? They call it recruit handwriting and every letter is a capital and written distinctly. Once learned it is perfectly legible and unambiguous when written with even the worst penmanship. It is used for official logs and forms which must be legible.
As far as I am concerned it is the only form of writing by hand that should ever be taught. In the modern world focusing on typing makes far more sense, its faster than speaking vocally let alone writing by hand.
'Keep a record of what it looks like for historical information, and let it die.'
I agree with the sentiment but how would you do that? Cursive isn't even consistent in style from one text book school chart to the next let alone one writer to the next.
In the rare instance that writing by hand is appropriate the best choice probably good old fashioned military recruit handwriting. All block letters and capitals written in such a way that no letter can be confused for another no matter who wrote it.
Just bring a laptop to take your notes with. You skip the extra step of typing it in later and typing is faster than shorthand. Even if you aren't that fast now you'll get faster soon enough. Typing is faster than vocalizing.
I do the same thing... except for the writing out and making notes and such. I type up the paper in a tiny fraction of the time it would take even a talented secretary to write it with shorthand and instead of making little notes I just make the corrections as I go. I then print it to PDF and have someone else read it and mark it up and then make whatever corrections of theirs I agree with.
You do know you can mark up a document in word or PDF files without writing more slowly than you can compose or killing trees right?
If it had been print then he would have known immediately that it was a foreign language. Cursive is utterly useless. If you need to record large volumes of information you type it. Its faster than cursive and some of us can type faster than you can dictate. If you need to secure it then you encrypt it, it will certainly be more secure than your hidden sticky note.
On the rare occasions when you need to write something the old fashioned way good old military recruit handwriting is the best choice.
You are mistaken. Mediawiki flags and notifies the second individual that that their edit conflicts with the previous edit. Or at least the wikibooks implementation does.
Threats to the president are a class of their own. I think its fairly safe to say that the secret service will ignore any law they need to under those circumstances. So outside of national security issues...
At what point for you does it become publishing in the U.S.? If they had snail mailed a vanity publisher and paid to have a video stream of the pages being flipped in realtime from the physical book sitting in the U.S.? Would that qualify as publishing in the U.S.?
They transmitted their 'manuscript' electronically to the United States of America. Where it was stored a physical machine located in the United States through which information can be retrieved.
Just because the storage mechanism is magnetic and accessed electronically rather than paper and ink does not change the act, does not change the laws that apply, and does not change the fact the location of the device (be it a bookstore or computer) that distributes the information is where that information is published.
People forget that with the Internet just because the steps all happen fast. Anything you download from a foreign website you imported into your country, even if it was you who uploaded (exported) it in the first place.
They published on U.S. servers and that means they published the material in the U.S. and therefore the publication falls under U.S. law. This ruling was bogus on the parts of both the US and the UK and obviously is politically motivated.
Actually I wasn't speaking about foreigners at all. I was referring to U.S. Citizens who go to another country and do something that is legal there but not legal here.
That is what happened here (except substitute UK for US). In this case, the UK citizens did something in the US that is perfectly legal in the US but are being attacked by the UK.
If you publish something on a US based server then the act of publishing occurred in the US. No matter what soil you happen to be standing on. The same is true if you break a US law with something you do on a US server... it doesn't matter what soil you are standing on, you have to answer to the US.
That my be true but the main reason for the nutritional difference between bottled and fountain soda is that the retail outlet gets to adjust the amount of water vs syrup in a fountain dispenser where the mfg bottled drink is at a fixed ratio that is almost always much higher (because they don't have to pay markup on the syrup).
In other news, watered down beer has fewer carbs than bottled.
Regardless, you can buy a fountain drink at the gas station for dramatically less than what it costs at a fast food outlet. If you buy the permanent large drink containers that many gas stations sell you can get the drinks even cheaper.
That was a fine bit of rhetoric. I especially love the grand finale in which you talk as if I'm some sort of religious fanatic.
'So its not the colour of their skin, its the way they talk?'
Yes. The dialect is referred to as ebonics. A tiny fraction of a percent of Americans are aware that it is a distinct and properly structured dialect of its own and has been well analyzed by linguists. Ironically, ebonics sounds almost exactly like the broken grammar of the uneducated. So the ignorant, would not elect someone who spoke ebonics because they would believe that person to be ignorant. Being able to speak American English properly is something americans expect from anyone they would consider to be their president.
'or the music they listen to?'
Yes and this is quite reasonable. The music one prefers to listen to is an indication of the subject matter they deem acceptable and especially if listened to at a young age has a significant impact on the listener. Whether the gang/drug culture came first or the rap/hip hop culture doesn't matter. At this point the music (which has an undeniable beat that is perfect for dancing and very catchy) reinforces and encourages the criminal and anti-social behavior. Teens in particular are drawn to just about anything that mature adults frown on and just about everything said in rap/hip hop music is something any sensible adult would frown upon.
Before the rap/hip culture it was the rock culture which advocates sex and drugs. There is no question that millions of teens were drawn in by the rock culture and that they did indeed explore the sex and drugs that the music romanticized. Luckily it turned out that sex and drugs weren't really all that bad. The same can not be said about the gang violence, crack, and degrading and objectification of women that rap/hip hop romanticizes.
In conclusion I would like to point out that while not everyone who listens to rap/hip hop engages in the behavior that the music they are listening to advocates a significant portion do and the ones who don't engage in the criminal aspects of the rap/hip hop culture still bring the rest of the culture and the music that encourages others to engage in criminal behavior with them.
'or they're method of social interaction (interesting you defend free expression on the next line btw, and ignore the possibility that loud/rude/obnoxious to you is rude to everyone).'
There are socially acceptable behaviors and those which are not acceptable. There is no doubt that these things are largely arbitrary but that doesn't mean people aren't entitled to their social values and to want to live near others with similar social values. For instance in most so called "white" neighborhoods it is considered impolite and inconsiderate to install a booming bass music system in your vehicle that rattles the windows of houses you pass. Its a statement that you care only about yourself and your own whims and don't value and respect the space of others.
'It doesn't matter what you hate.'
Who said I "hate" anything or anyone? I'm simply pointing out that there is no "new racism" only a culture clash and that there is nothing racist about people wanting to live with others who have similar values and not wanting their children influenced by those with conflicting values.
"And if you really have a problem with Ebonics, I suggest you stay away from all of the UK except London cause we don't speak the Queens or the Puritans English either - for many years Scottish colloquialisms were viewed as uneducated broken English, we weren't even allowed to say 'aye' in front of a policeman without being accused of being disrespectful."
That certainly sounds extreme to me and it seems that this may be the (understandable given your example) chord I struck that upset you so.
However, anyone who wants to lead a nation should speak that nations primary language in a manner that is academically correct. It demonstrates both education and a respect for those you wish to govern. Both
It does indeed, which is my point. Either it sorts itself out or a statistical majority of minorities are lazy and perform poorly on the job. Either way the laws are bunk.
I'm not dealing with how things actually are here but rather how they should be. If we are dealing with how things are there is no point in having this discussion because for better or worse legislated racism is a very popular talking point. It picks you up the minority vote and the soccer moms who want to support things that make them sound holy and righteous.
The short term game is fine and dandy for the individual but is a damn poor way to run a nation.
They didn't publish in the UK, they published in the US. I don't know about the UK but here in the US we acknowledge that actions committed in other countries fall under the laws of that country.
If this were a corporation doing business under the laws of another country in that country there would zero chance of prosecuting the CEO even though he never actually left our soil. Why should corporations be afforded more rights than actual human beings?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not sure I've ever captured a fully meaning. What do they look like?
I've never needed to use diagrams in personal notes. Once I 'get' the concept or visual then my text description is enough to recall it.
I realize other people think more visually and you could easily use a simple graphical program for diagrams or stick with pencil and paper for that. Cursive text and pencil and paper aren't mutually inclusive. Just because you type the text doesn't mean you have to abandon paper altogether if that is what you find comfortable. Number your diagrams with print and reference them at the appropriate points in your notes. You can even scan them in later.
Diagrams and pictures are (mostly) innately clear to anyone versed in the subject matter. Nobody is going to have trouble reading your sketch of a living room, particularly with clear block letter labels indicating each piece of furniture.
Mine resembles a wavy line. I can identify my wavy line versus someone elses wavy line but I certainly couldn't explain how.
'letter for a job candidature'
I can't tell is that a convoluted way of saying resume, cover letter, or a letter of recommendation? In any of those cases typing would be more appropriate than writing by hand. An exception might be the signature on the letter.
The only time I know of that it makes sense to send an awkward handwritten letter is when sending a letter to a congress critter. The myth is that they pay more attention when you take the time and effort to write the letter by hand. The reality is that no matter what form of communication you send you get a form letter back on that particular topic or issue and your opinion is completely ignored. Maybe because the elections are rigged. *shrugs*
Typing and laptop is faster and more effective than writing. If its short enough that its actually more convenient to write by hand then its short enough to print in legible block letters.
When I ask if someone speaks greek I'm referring to a sex act, not a language. I find greek to be a very important skill in a partner whether we interact for a night or a lifetime.
As for the languages.. I don't really see the point in having more than one. Just integrate the words and concepts that better expressed in other languages into English, call it Shaitanese in honor of the brilliant thinker who proposed this idea, and phase everything else out. It might take time to move to it like it takes time to move to the metric system but there is certainly no need to teach the old languages in school. People will learn them at home, teach Shaitanese in school and educate in Shaitanese from thereon in. Language is not part of culture, its a communication device and in a global society a global language is needed.
I find even those old documents to be difficult to read. Most 'neat' cursive is either pigeon scratch where lower case letters are hard to distinguish or bubbly where every letter is difficult to interpret. I've never seen cursive that wasn't produced by a computer font that was legible enough to read fluidly without any pauses or hesitations.
Print, particularly if you omit the lowercase letters on the hand is very legible even if written by a child. If you are recording more than a couple lines a computer is a better choice anyway.
Having moved around ALOT as a child I had the benefit of seeing lots of cursive charts and even the charts varied on the details of how to form letters.
Increasingly fine manual dexterity simply isn't needed though. Your brain has a fixed capacity and the ability to analyze and interpret the meaning of a new interface of buttons or a form of code is probably more useful filler than manual dexterity.
Like cursive, its only a problem because it doesn't need solved. People aren't skilled with cursive because they aren't using it. Fortunately, nobody is using cursive because they have no need of it and thus no need of the skill.
Most tasks requiring manual dexterity are being replaced by computer controlled system that are far more accurate than a trained human hand or eye. I mean really, a $5000 mechanical watch is nice for nostalgia and overpriced status symbols but a $5 almost entirely computer designed and manufactured digital timex is by far a superior timepiece in terms of utility.
Why would you write in the hurry in the first place? That is what typing is for.
Pretty is not legible. I've seen so much 'pretty' bubble cursive that was completely illegible it makes me want to scream.
Writing by hand isn't a good method to use for writing anything beyond two or three words.
Your father was probably in the military right? They call it recruit handwriting and every letter is a capital and written distinctly. Once learned it is perfectly legible and unambiguous when written with even the worst penmanship. It is used for official logs and forms which must be legible.
As far as I am concerned it is the only form of writing by hand that should ever be taught. In the modern world focusing on typing makes far more sense, its faster than speaking vocally let alone writing by hand.
'Keep a record of what it looks like for historical information, and let it die.'
I agree with the sentiment but how would you do that? Cursive isn't even consistent in style from one text book school chart to the next let alone one writer to the next.
In the rare instance that writing by hand is appropriate the best choice probably good old fashioned military recruit handwriting. All block letters and capitals written in such a way that no letter can be confused for another no matter who wrote it.
Just bring a laptop to take your notes with. You skip the extra step of typing it in later and typing is faster than shorthand. Even if you aren't that fast now you'll get faster soon enough. Typing is faster than vocalizing.
I do the same thing... except for the writing out and making notes and such. I type up the paper in a tiny fraction of the time it would take even a talented secretary to write it with shorthand and instead of making little notes I just make the corrections as I go. I then print it to PDF and have someone else read it and mark it up and then make whatever corrections of theirs I agree with.
You do know you can mark up a document in word or PDF files without writing more slowly than you can compose or killing trees right?
fscking muggles
If it had been print then he would have known immediately that it was a foreign language. Cursive is utterly useless. If you need to record large volumes of information you type it. Its faster than cursive and some of us can type faster than you can dictate. If you need to secure it then you encrypt it, it will certainly be more secure than your hidden sticky note.
On the rare occasions when you need to write something the old fashioned way good old military recruit handwriting is the best choice.
You are mistaken. Mediawiki flags and notifies the second individual that that their edit conflicts with the previous edit. Or at least the wikibooks implementation does.
True but in fairness to you, you did say NEED and a jury is optional.
Course it all depends, sometimes all you need is one military hardass with a cattle prod and a rubber glove.
Threats to the president are a class of their own. I think its fairly safe to say that the secret service will ignore any law they need to under those circumstances. So outside of national security issues...
At what point for you does it become publishing in the U.S.? If they had snail mailed a vanity publisher and paid to have a video stream of the pages being flipped in realtime from the physical book sitting in the U.S.? Would that qualify as publishing in the U.S.?
They transmitted their 'manuscript' electronically to the United States of America. Where it was stored a physical machine located in the United States through which information can be retrieved.
Just because the storage mechanism is magnetic and accessed electronically rather than paper and ink does not change the act, does not change the laws that apply, and does not change the fact the location of the device (be it a bookstore or computer) that distributes the information is where that information is published.
People forget that with the Internet just because the steps all happen fast. Anything you download from a foreign website you imported into your country, even if it was you who uploaded (exported) it in the first place.
They published on U.S. servers and that means they published the material in the U.S. and therefore the publication falls under U.S. law. This ruling was bogus on the parts of both the US and the UK and obviously is politically motivated.
Actually I wasn't speaking about foreigners at all. I was referring to U.S. Citizens who go to another country and do something that is legal there but not legal here.
That is what happened here (except substitute UK for US). In this case, the UK citizens did something in the US that is perfectly legal in the US but are being attacked by the UK.
If you publish something on a US based server then the act of publishing occurred in the US. No matter what soil you happen to be standing on. The same is true if you break a US law with something you do on a US server... it doesn't matter what soil you are standing on, you have to answer to the US.
That my be true but the main reason for the nutritional difference between bottled and fountain soda is that the retail outlet gets to adjust the amount of water vs syrup in a fountain dispenser where the mfg bottled drink is at a fixed ratio that is almost always much higher (because they don't have to pay markup on the syrup).
In other news, watered down beer has fewer carbs than bottled.
Regardless, you can buy a fountain drink at the gas station for dramatically less than what it costs at a fast food outlet. If you buy the permanent large drink containers that many gas stations sell you can get the drinks even cheaper.
That was a fine bit of rhetoric. I especially love the grand finale in which you talk as if I'm some sort of religious fanatic.
'So its not the colour of their skin, its the way they talk?'
Yes. The dialect is referred to as ebonics. A tiny fraction of a percent of Americans are aware that it is a distinct and properly structured dialect of its own and has been well analyzed by linguists. Ironically, ebonics sounds almost exactly like the broken grammar of the uneducated. So the ignorant, would not elect someone who spoke ebonics because they would believe that person to be ignorant. Being able to speak American English properly is something americans expect from anyone they would consider to be their president.
'or the music they listen to?'
Yes and this is quite reasonable. The music one prefers to listen to is an indication of the subject matter they deem acceptable and especially if listened to at a young age has a significant impact on the listener. Whether the gang/drug culture came first or the rap/hip hop culture doesn't matter. At this point the music (which has an undeniable beat that is perfect for dancing and very catchy) reinforces and encourages the criminal and anti-social behavior. Teens in particular are drawn to just about anything that mature adults frown on and just about everything said in rap/hip hop music is something any sensible adult would frown upon.
Before the rap/hip culture it was the rock culture which advocates sex and drugs. There is no question that millions of teens were drawn in by the rock culture and that they did indeed explore the sex and drugs that the music romanticized. Luckily it turned out that sex and drugs weren't really all that bad. The same can not be said about the gang violence, crack, and degrading and objectification of women that rap/hip hop romanticizes.
In conclusion I would like to point out that while not everyone who listens to rap/hip hop engages in the behavior that the music they are listening to advocates a significant portion do and the ones who don't engage in the criminal aspects of the rap/hip hop culture still bring the rest of the culture and the music that encourages others to engage in criminal behavior with them.
'or they're method of social interaction (interesting you defend free expression on the next line btw, and ignore the possibility that loud/rude/obnoxious to you is rude to everyone).'
There are socially acceptable behaviors and those which are not acceptable. There is no doubt that these things are largely arbitrary but that doesn't mean people aren't entitled to their social values and to want to live near others with similar social values. For instance in most so called "white" neighborhoods it is considered impolite and inconsiderate to install a booming bass music system in your vehicle that rattles the windows of houses you pass. Its a statement that you care only about yourself and your own whims and don't value and respect the space of others.
'It doesn't matter what you hate.'
Who said I "hate" anything or anyone? I'm simply pointing out that there is no "new racism" only a culture clash and that there is nothing racist about people wanting to live with others who have similar values and not wanting their children influenced by those with conflicting values.
"And if you really have a problem with Ebonics, I suggest you stay away from all of the UK except London cause we don't speak the Queens or the Puritans English either - for many years Scottish colloquialisms were viewed as uneducated broken English, we weren't even allowed to say 'aye' in front of a policeman without being accused of being disrespectful."
That certainly sounds extreme to me and it seems that this may be the (understandable given your example) chord I struck that upset you so.
However, anyone who wants to lead a nation should speak that nations primary language in a manner that is academically correct. It demonstrates both education and a respect for those you wish to govern. Both
Exactly.
It does indeed, which is my point. Either it sorts itself out or a statistical majority of minorities are lazy and perform poorly on the job. Either way the laws are bunk.
I'm not dealing with how things actually are here but rather how they should be. If we are dealing with how things are there is no point in having this discussion because for better or worse legislated racism is a very popular talking point. It picks you up the minority vote and the soccer moms who want to support things that make them sound holy and righteous.
The short term game is fine and dandy for the individual but is a damn poor way to run a nation.
They didn't publish in the UK, they published in the US. I don't know about the UK but here in the US we acknowledge that actions committed in other countries fall under the laws of that country.
If this were a corporation doing business under the laws of another country in that country there would zero chance of prosecuting the CEO even though he never actually left our soil. Why should corporations be afforded more rights than actual human beings?