I worked in ISP support for years and USENET was dying well before child porn was a nail in it's coffin. Probably has something to do with message boards with much friendlier interfaces, or that ISPs never went out of their way to try to explain what usenet is.
I find linguistic comedy in the fact that you refer to USENET being dead ("nail in . . . coffin") immediately before you refer to it as being alive ("usenet is"), especially in a way where most native speakers would erroneously use the past tense ("never went . . . to explain what usenet [was]").
For many "specialized" topics, there's still nothing better than USENET. As someone who speaks Japanese proficiently but not natively, I cannot find anywhere on IRC where people are as proficient as me. Typical comments on #japanese on various servers tend to be things like, "Hey guys, what's the difference between watashi and boku?" [this is a novice question] Web forums typically have a ton of otaku screaming, "WATASHI KAWAII DESU!" all the time [this is gramatically incorrect and stupid ("I cute!" basically)].
There is no place for upper-middle- and upper-level Japanese speakers online. However, there is a USENET group where such talented people exist.
I could go to 2ch.net and get my fill that way, but I'd rather practice writing properly and not in the Japanese version of 1337.
I mean, they don't even have governmental ratings for movies!
Before people mod me "funny" or something, note that the current film ratings are not government mandated or enforced. They are completely voluntary and admission is governed by contractual relationships between theaters and distributors/studios/the MPAA.
Basically, a theater can let 13-year-olds into an R-rated movie. However, if the studio or whoever finds out, they'll stop allowing the theater to show their movies in the theater.
This was because years ago, the government DID threaten to create a rating system, so the MPAA/studios created a rating system of their own and the government backed off.
Actually, I saw The Dark Knight on Friday night in the US, and I didn't see the trailer. In fact, my theater didn't play ANY trailers before the movie.
I found Deitel and Deitel's C++ book to be good when I was in high school. I took a college C++ class while a sophomore in high school, and that's the book we used. A programmatically-oriented high school kid found the book instructive, at least.
Although we didn't make it much past operator overloading...
Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything. I was programming when I was 4. That doesn't change the fact that, "4 year olds are interested in Spongebob and mud, not writing BASIC code," is a non-offensive and correct statement.
If you required every statement made to have all stereotypes stripped away from it, there would be almost nothing we could say about the real world. It would strip us of almost all of physics, chemistry, and biology, seeing as how they are all incomplete models of their particular targets of study.
I started programming in BASIC when I was after my dad taught me 1 CLS 10 PRINT "My brother smells", 20 GOTO 10
I later improved after getting AOL in elementary school and picking apart Pong Kombat, a Pong-Mortal Kombat hybrid. I learned the fatalities by reading the source.
Why is it that you feel people are entitled to luxury?
Irrelevant. If it is absolutely true that the person would not have bought a product he pirated (e.g., a college student pirating Photoshop CS3--I don't know a single college student who can afford that program), then from a utilitarian perspective, it is illogical and detrimental to society for him to NOT pirate it (assuming he will actually use it).
Of course, if he will use it once he gets a job and can afford it, then the logic breaks down. In this case, he should make the purchase.
The simpler definition is "anything less than 18."
Because even if it's not a leap year, your definition misses out on people who are, e.g., 17yr, 364dy, 23hr, 59min 59.9s old.
You know, if we're going to get stuck in a bitch war about who is misinterpreting whom, we should at least be clear in our terminology: A pedophile is someone who is attracted to prepubescents. An ephebophile is someone who is attracted to young postpubescents.
Guess what! Switch the word "own" with "license," and you have the exact same thing, except one is permanent and the other is temporary.
Can you explain to me why the length of ownership matters here?
I don't know why people insist on calling them Jr. and Sr. They're not. One is George Walker Bush, and the other is George HERBERT Walker Bush. That means they are not Jr. and Sr., as that requires identity of first, middle, and last names.
Wouldn't that then prove that charisma is more important than money, in opposition to your previously stated thesis that money is more important than charisma?
The Constitution begins with "We the People of the United States." Therefore, it is safe to assume that wherever else the Constitution uses "the People" as opposed to "People" without the definite article, it uses it as a shortened form of "the People of the United States."
If the Constitution said "the right of people," then it would be referring to all of humankind. However, it says "the right of THE people" which refers to citizens of the US (or just people located within US borders, since you could say that noncitizen residents are still "of the United States").
Because if you're ultra-left and vote for, at best, a perfectly honest McCain, you're voting much more against interest than if you vote for, at worst, a hypocrite you agree with most of the time.
I'll be honest: I don't see much abuse of power going on in the Judiciary. I see some controversial opinions held by federal justices, and I see weird or wonky opinions, but I don't see the kind of corruption we see in the other two branches. Do you?
If so, examples?
And note that I asked for examples of the corruption (as you alleged), not stupid decisions like the YouTube-Viacom one handed down last week. I can love an idiot; I cannot love a devil.
Pelosi is the Speaker of the House; she has absolutely no control over anything in the Senate.
I think you mean Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader.
I'd like to point out that nearly 50% of the Congress is still Republican. So if you're trying to implicate Democrats as rated at 10%, that's not entirely accurate.
Slashdot Mirror
I find linguistic comedy in the fact that you refer to USENET being dead ("nail in . . . coffin") immediately before you refer to it as being alive ("usenet is"), especially in a way where most native speakers would erroneously use the past tense ("never went . . . to explain what usenet [was]").
Could be just because I'm a grammar geek, though.
I'm a 24-year-old college (OK, graduate) student and I think Facebook is a terrible way of communicating, vastly inferior to email.
Facebook wins against email when either a person's email is not known, or when you want group communication, rather than personal communication.
For many "specialized" topics, there's still nothing better than USENET. As someone who speaks Japanese proficiently but not natively, I cannot find anywhere on IRC where people are as proficient as me. Typical comments on #japanese on various servers tend to be things like, "Hey guys, what's the difference between watashi and boku?" [this is a novice question] Web forums typically have a ton of otaku screaming, "WATASHI KAWAII DESU!" all the time [this is gramatically incorrect and stupid ("I cute!" basically)].
There is no place for upper-middle- and upper-level Japanese speakers online. However, there is a USENET group where such talented people exist.
I could go to 2ch.net and get my fill that way, but I'd rather practice writing properly and not in the Japanese version of 1337.
Agreed.
I mean, they don't even have governmental ratings for movies!
Before people mod me "funny" or something, note that the current film ratings are not government mandated or enforced. They are completely voluntary and admission is governed by contractual relationships between theaters and distributors/studios/the MPAA.
Basically, a theater can let 13-year-olds into an R-rated movie. However, if the studio or whoever finds out, they'll stop allowing the theater to show their movies in the theater.
This was because years ago, the government DID threaten to create a rating system, so the MPAA/studios created a rating system of their own and the government backed off.
Actually, I saw The Dark Knight on Friday night in the US, and I didn't see the trailer. In fact, my theater didn't play ANY trailers before the movie.
I'm sure there was at least one person with nine-inch nails in that crazy Persian caravan.
THERE WAS A FRIGGING HOOKAH-SMOKING GOAT-HEADED MAN
As it is, he's clearly not the abalonly funnyman on Slashdot.
I found Deitel and Deitel's C++ book to be good when I was in high school. I took a college C++ class while a sophomore in high school, and that's the book we used. A programmatically-oriented high school kid found the book instructive, at least.
Although we didn't make it much past operator overloading...
Agreed. Here's PHP in a nutshell (and I use it for all web-based stuff I do):
here_i_use_underscores(hereIUseCamelCase(hereiusenothing($string)));
ARGH! The developers never seem to have decided upon a library function naming scheme.
Anecdotal evidence doesn't prove anything. I was programming when I was 4. That doesn't change the fact that, "4 year olds are interested in Spongebob and mud, not writing BASIC code," is a non-offensive and correct statement.
If you required every statement made to have all stereotypes stripped away from it, there would be almost nothing we could say about the real world. It would strip us of almost all of physics, chemistry, and biology, seeing as how they are all incomplete models of their particular targets of study.
I started programming in BASIC when I was after my dad taught me
1 CLS
10 PRINT "My brother smells",
20 GOTO 10
I later improved after getting AOL in elementary school and picking apart Pong Kombat, a Pong-Mortal Kombat hybrid. I learned the fatalities by reading the source.
Irrelevant. If it is absolutely true that the person would not have bought a product he pirated (e.g., a college student pirating Photoshop CS3--I don't know a single college student who can afford that program), then from a utilitarian perspective, it is illogical and detrimental to society for him to NOT pirate it (assuming he will actually use it). Of course, if he will use it once he gets a job and can afford it, then the logic breaks down. In this case, he should make the purchase.
The simpler definition is "anything less than 18." Because even if it's not a leap year, your definition misses out on people who are, e.g., 17yr, 364dy, 23hr, 59min 59.9s old.
You know, if we're going to get stuck in a bitch war about who is misinterpreting whom, we should at least be clear in our terminology: A pedophile is someone who is attracted to prepubescents. An ephebophile is someone who is attracted to young postpubescents.
Guess what! Switch the word "own" with "license," and you have the exact same thing, except one is permanent and the other is temporary. Can you explain to me why the length of ownership matters here?
I don't know why people insist on calling them Jr. and Sr. They're not. One is George Walker Bush, and the other is George HERBERT Walker Bush. That means they are not Jr. and Sr., as that requires identity of first, middle, and last names.
Wouldn't that then prove that charisma is more important than money, in opposition to your previously stated thesis that money is more important than charisma?
The Constitution begins with "We the People of the United States." Therefore, it is safe to assume that wherever else the Constitution uses "the People" as opposed to "People" without the definite article, it uses it as a shortened form of "the People of the United States." If the Constitution said "the right of people," then it would be referring to all of humankind. However, it says "the right of THE people" which refers to citizens of the US (or just people located within US borders, since you could say that noncitizen residents are still "of the United States").
Ideological politics suck. You cannot accomplish anything without compromise. Riposte? /devil's advocate
I think only half of them did. As opposed to 100% of Republicans.
Because if you're ultra-left and vote for, at best, a perfectly honest McCain, you're voting much more against interest than if you vote for, at worst, a hypocrite you agree with most of the time.
I'll be honest: I don't see much abuse of power going on in the Judiciary. I see some controversial opinions held by federal justices, and I see weird or wonky opinions, but I don't see the kind of corruption we see in the other two branches. Do you? If so, examples? And note that I asked for examples of the corruption (as you alleged), not stupid decisions like the YouTube-Viacom one handed down last week. I can love an idiot; I cannot love a devil.
Pelosi is the Speaker of the House; she has absolutely no control over anything in the Senate. I think you mean Harry Reid, the Senate Majority Leader.
How the hell is this informative? Ron Paul isn't even in the Senate! It's the exact opposite of informative! It's false.
I'd like to point out that nearly 50% of the Congress is still Republican. So if you're trying to implicate Democrats as rated at 10%, that's not entirely accurate.