I found the following at the VERY LINK that you posted.
3. (Gram.) A classification of nouns, primarily according to sex; and secondarily according to some fancied or imputed quality associated with sex.
Gender is a grammatical distinction and applies to words only. Sex is natural distinction and applies to living objects. R. Morris.
Dictionaries are lists of meanings, not canonical guides to usage.
I doubt that you would find a usage and style guide that would recommend this use of the word gender. Actually, perhaps you could in this perverted "PC" version of English that is so popular these days.
-Peter
PS: While I am at it, a podium is a thing you stand ON and a lectern is a thing you stand BEHIND.
Gender has to do with language. People do not have a gender, words do.
The word "she" is feminine. (gender) The person Susie is a woman. (sex)
So, the article and nothing to do with gender, it had to do with sex. (The characteristic, not the activity.)
A proper response to "Did you see the person who walked through here?" is "I did not see him." Even it the person is a woman. Both "person" and "he" (in this instance) are gender neutral.
Note that "they" and "them" are always plural. ALWAYS! If you are only talking about one person say "he" or "him" if you don't know the persons sex.
Before you go "aww, who cares? pete-classic sux." ask yourself, would you take the same caviler attitude towards the rules of C or perl? (Okay, maybe perl people would. There is more than one way to speak English (incorrectly);-)
They would never dream of sitting a kid in front of a map and expecting him to learn geography, or handing him a book, and expecting him to learn to read.
But they sit kids in front of computers with (questionable) "educational" software, then pat themselves on the back for figuring out that kids don't learn anything this way.
I learned the first rudiments of programming on a VIC-20 when I was about nine. This helped me be a critical thinker, and to understand the rules of logic. I doubt that I would have learned much from that mind numbing, brain sucking reader rabbit.
I think that there is way too much technology for us to use single use garbagemen.
How about one that "rests" in an orbit that keeps it in the sun (this is possible, no?) then "attacks" junk. Then deorbits it by pushing geting above and in front of the junk in a decaying orbit,then pushing off, stealing energy from the junk? This would improve its orbit, and degrade that of the junk.
I understand that this would be painfully slow, but if there were several of this things working (semi-)autonomously it would be workable.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I just finished 2061. The story is really all about large amounts of diamond in (unstable) orbit around Lucifer.
This all sets up 3001, which I have only just started, but (at least the set-up) it is anchored on the availability of large amounts of diamond, because it is the only material that can be used to make "space elevators."
Except that it isn't. I understand that, theoretically, buckieballs (sp?) could also be used. While (I don't think) it would be as strong, it would be MUCH lighter, and the forces other than it's weight are minimal when compared to its weight.
Anyway, I just finished reading this, and the parent to this post came up on my MetaModeration, and it was too much of a coincidence to pass up.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I'm not clear on where you think schools should get the money they need to run.
Public schools are constantly being told "do x or lose funding."
"Racial" (actually ethnic) quotas are a prime example. I am against them (becasue I am not a racist), but the current regime still uses my money to try to force schools to impliment them.
I hope that you don't honestly think that governments arent an "interest"?
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Can information be property? Is RMS correct in his belief that information "wants" to be free.
This is at the heart of my "theft by receiving" argument.
So if possession of information is synonymous with ownership, then no discretion is needed.
But, if the secret (or binary) belongs to me, the fact that it can be effortlessly replicated does not absolve you of your responisbility not to steal it.
I have heard people argue that the GPL sucks, because you shouldn't tell me what to do with MY copy of source code that you happen to have writen. (The argument, which I believe I have faithfully, if tersely, reproduced was in favor of relesing source to the public domain instead of under GPL.)
What do you think of this position?
If you want to take the discussion (which you have graciously de-escalated, thank you) off slashdot and respond by email, feel free. I think the proper address is evident.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Okay, let's say that MacNN found the screenshots lying on the sidewalk.
The fact remains that Adobe did not release this "to the world" and just becasue it was someone else who violated the agreemnet, that does not mean that MacNN is in the right.
Am I absolved from responsibility if I buy something that I know good and well is stolen. Not in any jursidiction I have ever lived in.
The bottom line is that emmett likes gossip sites, and does not want Adobe (which automatically has no rights becasue they are a big company) to have any control over there own property.
Lets shed a slightly different light on this.
How about if emmett gave a copy of his house key to his girlfriend, who then (against their explicit agreement) gives a copy to his neighbor. The neighbor then procededs to unlock the door to his house, takes a bunch of pictures and puts them on his website.
And let's say further, that the neighbor gets a really good lawyer, and a judge finds that since he got the key by "legal" means (ie he did not steal it) and he did not enter emmett's house without permission, there was no crime.
Here is the big question: does emmett have a case in civil court.
OF COURSE HE DOES. And no one (to speak of) on slashdot would say otherwise. But, since there are big companies keeping secrets, and beloved "individual rights to do whatever the hell we please, no matter who we trample on" belief, everyone signs on with "down with Adobe."
My final question to you is: did you "start thinking before you open your mouth" when you (in an amazing stroke of intellect) call me a moron, without making even the simplest attpemt to understand my arguement?
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Once again opensource licensing has been miserably confused with abandoning copyrights.
If anyone wants to do a OSS project that is closed until it is "ready" for an inital release they may.
This can be a complicated issue (like when Corel tried to do it, and did it wrong.) when there is dependency on other OSS ware. But if I want to release v0.0.0.001-pre0 of my pete-classic grep clone under the non-exclusive "post screenshots and suffer my wrath" license, then switch to GPL at v0.0.1 I may.
I would say it is common for projects to go through a closed incubation period.
The point is MY SHIT IS MY SHIT. Why do so many slashdotters feel that mob think absolves one of moral obligations.
Bottom line. If I share something with you under the EXPRESS AGREEMNET that you will KEEP IT TO YOURSELF and you don't you are a DISHONEST, LYING, PIECE OF CRAP. Even if emmett thinks you are cool.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I don't expect Mr. AC racist to take anything away from this, but anyone who has any interest in the TRUTH may want to read on.
The biological FACT is that inter-breeding produces SUPERIOR offspring.
Native American Indians were desimated largely becasue of their lack of genetic diversity. The Royal Families of Europe were so "pure" white that they could bleed to death from a little nick.
Frankly, I think that people (particularly women, since I am a man.) of mixed "racial" background (be it Asian, African, European, or American) are particularly attractive. But that's just me.
I put "racial" in quotes, as we are all the same race.
So, Mr. AC racist coward, it is nice for you to be able to justify your racist attitude with your little make-belive "facts." Try not to let it effect others.
Finally, since you want to bring peoples kids into this, who's kids suffer more; your kids who's hearts and minds are filled with your irrational hate and fear, or "mixed" kids who have to live in the same world with them?
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
The US government is designed to be a plodding, ineffective beast.
It is harder for a governmnet that can't get out of its own way to trample the rights of the people.
Before you flame me, note the use of the work "harder."
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Hope this doesn't sound lame. . .
on
Linux Failover?
·
· Score: 1
I have worked with NT "clusters" that do just this. From what I have seen they create more downtime with there complexity than they prevent.
How about this:
2 single port NICs in each sys with a crossover.
Write some (simple) program to do a heartbeat over this connection.
If the "standby" system loses the heartbeat it pings the "live" system with it's other NIC which is configured with a different IP than the "live" system. If the ping fails, a little script runs that takes that if down and brings it back up with the "live" IP.
Have the "standby" system periodically mirror the data on teh "live" system (maybe over the private NIC to keep traffic on the main connection down.
I know that this is not perfect, but it illustrates that there can be a simple solution. It could work quite well in an env where there is a fair amount of tolerance. (IE where it is okay to say "transaction failed, please retry.")
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Aphr0 said: Ok. Wonderful. The system files can't be touched. However, all of the user's files could be erased. All the presentations, pictures, documents, spreadsheets, personal items, etc. System files can be fixed with a reinstall of the application/os; user files cannot. You either lose whatever work you did since the last backup or you lose everything if you don't back up your files.
It would seem that you neglected to read the thread before posting. My comments (which were on the topic of the thread) were in reference to an email attachment potentially deleting system files.
Let me modify my admonition to: Read the thread and think before posting.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
>If you hide file extensions, then the item shows up with the vbs icon, not the text icon
>Doesn't matter. The WRONG icon showed up, and any user should recognize that.
So you and YU Nicks are saying that ICONS ARE A SECURITY FEATURE!?!?!?! You can't be serious.
I did write my original post with the assumption that I (or you) am (are) not running email attachments a root. I can't help it that some people are that stupid.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Is someone else responsible for their piss-poor OS design?
Ask yourself this, what constructive purpose can there be for an email client that can change system files? Why should an email client be caused to generate messages by another message?
Maybe you can come up with some contrived "use" for this, but it is clearly not worth it.
Who is responsible for this "functionality"? Microsoft. No one else.
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
When it comes to bargaining, whoever says a number first loses.
In retail, you always lose. (have you ever been haggled UP in price at walmart?)
Many companies that are Quasi-retail (like these guys) try to hold the price close, so they can make as much as they can.
This is not surprising, really. With this type of product you can't pop into "the other guy's" store to see what he charges, so you have to be careful trying to sense what the market will bear.
I am sure that they feel that the business that they lose (yours) is outweighed by what they would lose (in prices and business) if they did "up front pricing." (with apologies to GM Service Plus.)
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Slashdot Mirror
I found the following at the VERY LINK that you posted.
3. (Gram.) A classification of nouns, primarily according to sex; and secondarily according to some fancied or imputed quality associated with sex.
Gender is a grammatical distinction and applies to words only. Sex is natural distinction and applies to living objects. R. Morris.
Dictionaries are lists of meanings, not canonical guides to usage.
I doubt that you would find a usage and style guide that would recommend this use of the word gender. Actually, perhaps you could in this perverted "PC" version of English that is so popular these days.
-Peter
PS: While I am at it, a podium is a thing you stand ON and a lectern is a thing you stand BEHIND.
Okay, yes a woman (or man) can be femmine. I am not arguing this.
I think that the article was talking about sex, not self declared gender. I don't think that they were including men in dresses as female.
-Peter
Gender has to do with language. People do not have a gender, words do.
;-)
The word "she" is feminine. (gender)
The person Susie is a woman. (sex)
So, the article and nothing to do with gender, it had to do with sex. (The characteristic, not the activity.)
A proper response to "Did you see the person who walked through here?" is "I did not see him." Even it the person is a woman. Both "person" and "he" (in this instance) are gender neutral.
Note that "they" and "them" are always plural. ALWAYS! If you are only talking about one person say "he" or "him" if you don't know the persons sex.
Before you go "aww, who cares? pete-classic sux." ask yourself, would you take the same caviler attitude towards the rules of C or perl? (Okay, maybe perl people would. There is more than one way to speak English (incorrectly)
These guys drive me nuts.
They would never dream of sitting a kid in front of a map and expecting him to learn geography, or handing him a book, and expecting him to learn to read.
But they sit kids in front of computers with (questionable) "educational" software, then pat themselves on the back for figuring out that kids don't learn anything this way.
I learned the first rudiments of programming on a VIC-20 when I was about nine. This helped me be a critical thinker, and to understand the rules of logic. I doubt that I would have learned much from that mind numbing, brain sucking reader rabbit.
F this, my kids are getting home schooled.
-Peter
If you support the 1st ammendment, but only as long as noone says anything offensive, you don't support the 1st ammendment.
It may be time to brush up on your history, veggie.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I think that there is way too much technology for us to use single use garbagemen.
How about one that "rests" in an orbit that keeps it in the sun (this is possible, no?) then "attacks" junk. Then deorbits it by pushing geting above and in front of the junk in a decaying orbit,then pushing off, stealing energy from the junk? This would improve its orbit, and degrade that of the junk.
I understand that this would be painfully slow, but if there were several of this things working (semi-)autonomously it would be workable.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Meant to say "Funny that a WEBSITE about ..."
don't flame me!
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
runs on the "latest and greatest" MS OS.
Check out the netcraft results here.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I just finished 2061. The story is really all about large amounts of diamond in (unstable) orbit around Lucifer.
This all sets up 3001, which I have only just started, but (at least the set-up) it is anchored on the availability of large amounts of diamond, because it is the only material that can be used to make "space elevators."
Except that it isn't. I understand that, theoretically, buckieballs (sp?) could also be used. While (I don't think) it would be as strong, it would be MUCH lighter, and the forces other than it's weight are minimal when compared to its weight.
Anyway, I just finished reading this, and the parent to this post came up on my MetaModeration, and it was too much of a coincidence to pass up.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I'm not clear on where you think schools should get the money they need to run.
Public schools are constantly being told "do x or lose funding."
"Racial" (actually ethnic) quotas are a prime example. I am against them (becasue I am not a racist), but the current regime still uses my money to try to force schools to impliment them.
I hope that you don't honestly think that governments arent an "interest"?
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
It is now clear where the breakdown is.
Can information be property? Is RMS correct in his belief that information "wants" to be free.
This is at the heart of my "theft by receiving" argument.
So if possession of information is synonymous with ownership, then no discretion is needed.
But, if the secret (or binary) belongs to me, the fact that it can be effortlessly replicated does not absolve you of your responisbility not to steal it.
I have heard people argue that the GPL sucks, because you shouldn't tell me what to do with MY copy of source code that you happen to have writen. (The argument, which I believe I have faithfully, if tersely, reproduced was in favor of relesing source to the public domain instead of under GPL.)
What do you think of this position?
If you want to take the discussion (which you have graciously de-escalated, thank you) off slashdot and respond by email, feel free. I think the proper address is evident.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Okay, let's say that MacNN found the screenshots lying on the sidewalk.
The fact remains that Adobe did not release this "to the world" and just becasue it was someone else who violated the agreemnet, that does not mean that MacNN is in the right.
Am I absolved from responsibility if I buy something that I know good and well is stolen. Not in any jursidiction I have ever lived in.
The bottom line is that emmett likes gossip sites, and does not want Adobe (which automatically has no rights becasue they are a big company) to have any control over there own property.
Lets shed a slightly different light on this.
How about if emmett gave a copy of his house key to his girlfriend, who then (against their explicit agreement) gives a copy to his neighbor. The neighbor then procededs to unlock the door to his house, takes a bunch of pictures and puts them on his website.
And let's say further, that the neighbor gets a really good lawyer, and a judge finds that since he got the key by "legal" means (ie he did not steal it) and he did not enter emmett's house without permission, there was no crime.
Here is the big question: does emmett have a case in civil court.
OF COURSE HE DOES. And no one (to speak of) on slashdot would say otherwise. But, since there are big companies keeping secrets, and beloved "individual rights to do whatever the hell we please, no matter who we trample on" belief, everyone signs on with "down with Adobe."
My final question to you is: did you "start thinking before you open your mouth" when you (in an amazing stroke of intellect) call me a moron, without making even the simplest attpemt to understand my arguement?
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Once again opensource licensing has been miserably confused with abandoning copyrights.
If anyone wants to do a OSS project that is closed until it is "ready" for an inital release they may.
This can be a complicated issue (like when Corel tried to do it, and did it wrong.) when there is dependency on other OSS ware. But if I want to release v0.0.0.001-pre0 of my pete-classic grep clone under the non-exclusive "post screenshots and suffer my wrath" license, then switch to GPL at v0.0.1 I may.
I would say it is common for projects to go through a closed incubation period.
The point is MY SHIT IS MY SHIT. Why do so many slashdotters feel that mob think absolves one of moral obligations.
Bottom line. If I share something with you under the EXPRESS AGREEMNET that you will KEEP IT TO YOURSELF and you don't you are a DISHONEST, LYING, PIECE OF CRAP. Even if emmett thinks you are cool.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I don't expect Mr. AC racist to take anything away from this, but anyone who has any interest in the TRUTH may want to read on.
The biological FACT is that inter-breeding produces SUPERIOR offspring.
Native American Indians were desimated largely becasue of their lack of genetic diversity. The Royal Families of Europe were so "pure" white that they could bleed to death from a little nick.
Frankly, I think that people (particularly women, since I am a man.) of mixed "racial" background (be it Asian, African, European, or American) are particularly attractive. But that's just me.
I put "racial" in quotes, as we are all the same race.
So, Mr. AC racist coward, it is nice for you to be able to justify your racist attitude with your little make-belive "facts." Try not to let it effect others.
Finally, since you want to bring peoples kids into this, who's kids suffer more; your kids who's hearts and minds are filled with your irrational hate and fear, or "mixed" kids who have to live in the same world with them?
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
This is "normal operation."
The US government is designed to be a plodding, ineffective beast.
It is harder for a governmnet that can't get out of its own way to trample the rights of the people.
Before you flame me, note the use of the work "harder."
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
I have worked with NT "clusters" that do just this. From what I have seen they create more downtime with there complexity than they prevent.
How about this:
2 single port NICs in each sys with a crossover.
Write some (simple) program to do a heartbeat over this connection.
If the "standby" system loses the heartbeat it pings the "live" system with it's other NIC which is configured with a different IP than the "live" system. If the ping fails, a little script runs that takes that if down and brings it back up with the "live" IP.
Have the "standby" system periodically mirror the data on teh "live" system (maybe over the private NIC to keep traffic on the main connection down.
I know that this is not perfect, but it illustrates that there can be a simple solution. It could work quite well in an env where there is a fair amount of tolerance. (IE where it is okay to say "transaction failed, please retry.")
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
You're soaking in it.
It is called the World Wide Web.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Aphr0 said:
Ok. Wonderful. The system files can't be touched. However, all of the user's files could be erased. All the presentations, pictures, documents, spreadsheets, personal items, etc. System files can be fixed with a reinstall of the application/os; user files cannot. You either lose whatever work you did since the last backup or you lose everything if you don't back up your files.
It would seem that you neglected to read the thread before posting. My comments (which were on the topic of the thread) were in reference to an email attachment potentially deleting system files.
Let me modify my admonition to: Read the thread and think before posting.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
First I would like to say that myc is absolutly correct.
Second, do you mean to suggest that wreaking havoc with system and data files is somehow better than protecting system files?
What would you propose? Not allowing users to delete their own files?
Next time you get the urge to post, think first.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
>Well if you leave yourself logged in, I can easily edit your login file with this line:
alias ls 'rm -R *'
Let me explain why this is not the same.
1. This will not effect system files. (unless "I" walk away from a root login, in which case, you own the system anyway, and "I" am just an idiot.)
2. If you do something to break the system under my login, then, from an OS design point of view, it is ME DOING IT.
NO SYSTEM CAN PROTECT AGAINST A PRIVILEGED USER WITH MALICIOUS INTENT!
So the question is WHY SHOULD EMAIL ATTACHMENTS RUN PRIVILEGED BY DEFAULT.
The answer is that they shouldn't, and that allowing it is piss-poor design.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
>If you hide file extensions, then the item shows up with the vbs icon, not the text icon
>Doesn't matter. The WRONG icon showed up, and any user should recognize that.
So you and YU Nicks are saying that ICONS ARE A SECURITY FEATURE!?!?!?! You can't be serious.
I did write my original post with the assumption that I (or you) am (are) not running email attachments a root. I can't help it that some people are that stupid.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
Not the same deal.
1. A "malicious" bash script can not make itself run as root.
2. I believe (may be wrong on this) that the thing "looks" like a text file if you have "known extensions hidden" as per default.
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
MS is very much responsible.
Is someone else responsible for their piss-poor OS design?
Ask yourself this, what constructive purpose can there be for an email client that can change system files? Why should an email client be caused to generate messages by another message?
Maybe you can come up with some contrived "use" for this, but it is clearly not worth it.
Who is responsible for this "functionality"? Microsoft. No one else.
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
>Digital copies of the Guide legally have to be bought
Read the subject. The discussion is about the possibility of Adams deciding to waive his copyrights.
The discussion has gone full circle.
-Peter
PS: The Louve is at http://www.louvre.fr/. Mona is at http://www.louvre.fr/fra ncais/magazine/joconde/jocon_f.htm
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.
When it comes to bargaining, whoever says a number first loses.
In retail, you always lose. (have you ever been haggled UP in price at walmart?)
Many companies that are Quasi-retail (like these guys) try to hold the price close, so they can make as much as they can.
This is not surprising, really. With this type of product you can't pop into "the other guy's" store to see what he charges, so you have to be careful trying to sense what the market will bear.
I am sure that they feel that the business that they lose (yours) is outweighed by what they would lose (in prices and business) if they did "up front pricing." (with apologies to GM Service Plus.)
-Peter
Slashdot cries out for open standards, then breaks them.