Monsters that use special attacks, like the Archvile
Any other monster, or just the Archvile? I've never seen this, in spite of having played level 20(?) of Plutonia, where you have a double-barrelled shotgun and like a zillion Archvilles.
I'm reasonably certain I've seen pain elementals attacked by their own Lost Souls, but it can be hard to keep track.
Also, I've never seen a monster with both contact and non-contact attacks get in a contact fight with its own species. (No Imp v. Imp, Hell Knight v. Hell Knight etc)
You see Lost Souls attacking each other all the time.
I think the idea here is that he doesn't want to lose face by having to withdraw. If he fights the remaining cases, he can hold up competitors, and when he loses, he can claim that he lost for some reason other than being in the wrong. He might claim the courts didn't understand the technical merits of his case, or some such.
Also, he probably wants to mantain SCO's reputation as litigious bastards, to threaten people with later.
It's not like the Australins are the ones who decided to enact draconian IP legislation. Harmonised IP laws would be a good thing if the DMCA wasn't in force. As it is, this system will lead to easier trade between the US and Australia, because trading partners on both sides will have a better idea what's legal. Blame the Americans if what's legal also sucks.
And how many people have had their lives shortened by a lack of protein in the diet? On average, it seems to me, eating meat is probably better for you than not eating meat. Avoid beef if you want, but why should lamb/mutton be any safer? In the end, what should make the news are vitamin deficiencies, fatty diets, lack of protein, obesity, alcoholism, smoking, anemia etc. Not some disease that kills 150 people over 10 years, no matter how terrible the symptoms are.
Why doesn't one just test to see if the eye is in shadow, and if it is, add 1? Equivalently, one could have an extremely small region around the eye which is not in shadow, too small to affect anything else, but it should make the z-pass come out ok. Or am I missing something?
The people who post no longer seem to read the articles. The article itself isn't just about which company has the best tech support, it's also about whose computers are more reliable.
IBM, not Apple, have the best support, but by contrast they have poor overall reliability. Apple hardware is susceptible to the fewest failures of the hardware vendors reviewed, which is why they are top of the list.
Take as an analogy the fortunes of the Macintosh. The best years for the mac were the early years (where there were only a handful of models around), and recently, with four or five well-defined product-lines. Sure, these are customiseable, but that's because they're computers. Nokia are going to lose customers who can't be bothered finding the phone that is best for them, and settle for 'the cheap motorola'.
I use a (reasonably old) Nokia 3310, mostly because it does everything I want; but also because it has an excellent UI. It's consistent, and there are only four controlling buttons (left/down, up/right, return and cancel); this means that it's almost never hard to hit the one you want. More buttons in a small space and for a simple device only means more confusion.
Then again, I suppose a fair few people who think they need a 'powerful' phone will buy one with more buttons than there are stars in the sky...
The 'mathematics' involved in the IMO is quite a different sort of enterprise from 'mathematics' as taught in universities. In particular, IMO mathematics assumes knowledge of high-school algebra, basic number theory and combinatorics, Euclidean geometry and the elementary theory of functions and sets. The problems are generally 'trivial', in that they have few further applications inside mathematics or outside mathematics (otherwise they'd probably alredy be well-known facts).
Essentially, the IMO is a problem-solving competition in which the problems and their means of solution are mathematical.
Anyone looking for examples of the sort material covered by the IMO should check out Kalva.
I suppose my point here is that 'olympiad mathematics' is potentially a sport, in much the same sense that chess is; this doesn't mean that research mathematics is a sport at all.
I think a more interesting article would compare the number of revoked and narrowed patents to the number of patents which are enforced succesfully.
On a similar note, I'd like to know what percentage of patents are non-aggressive, either patents that are filed and never infringed or attacked, due to obscurity, or patents that are purely defensive. I'm sure no-one really cares about a large percentage of the 7,000,000 patents referred to.
Since `hobbyists' and students are willing to write software and release it for nothing, isn't it inefficient to pay people money to do the same thing? Granted, this may mean fewer jobs in software engineering, but this simply means technical people will work in other fields. Jobs don't simply disappear for ever when you cut redundancy; in fact, with fewer people tied up writing unnecessary code, the capacity of the economy to grow should increse.
Also, isn't discouraging open-source akin to protectionist economics, which have not been generally succesful? Gates is a free marketeer when it suits him, but here he's appealing to legislators and governments to protect his fledgeling, ailing, company. He sounds like a swindler to me.
You are technically correct concerning the point that 'to my perspective' is used. You are foolish to use such a neologistic construction in this thread. Does this explain? I hope you see my post in the slightly sent-up spirit in which it was offered, and not simply as abusive.
And as for your remark that you read more than I do, it's simply insulting. I'd like you to withdraw it please. As we have discussed elsewhere, I accept many more things as valid English than I am prepared to write, whereas you have a marginally more liberal style.
I think you are still misreading me. I never said the word didn't exist. It does, and I do have a mental tab on it that says 'ungrammatical'. This much we both agree on.
And I say that this word is not used in the scientific literature, and I see you agree with this too. Therefore, I believe the word is out of place on such an intellectual site as this one, and to use it would make one seem illiterate
I now can tell (although we were previously at cross purposes) that do not disagree on the question of who uses the word.
Unless I am mistaken this debate hinges on whether one should use the word 'virii' on Slashdot; you say one should, since it's a word as good as any other, and I say one shouldn't, because it sounds illeterate in a literate context. Or is there something further I'm missing?
Although I am not a linguist, (as my misinterpretations of your terms has made clear), I have at least some familiarity with the history of English, and find your lessons on 'pea' a mite patronising. But I'm sure you'll forgive me that--- and withhold the one on 'bride'.
To say 'Unliterary provenance is the norm' seems to me to be a lie at worst, or a sleight of hand at best. Today, the majority of words entering the language arise in highly specialised fields, and therefore have a highly literary provenance.
Whereas you are right in saying that 'lamentable to my perspective' is grammatical, that's not to say that you don't look like a retard when you use a newfangled (and still slightly dubious) construction while being arch.
I am afraid you misinterpret my use of 'authority'. By 'authority' I mean printed reference, such as a dictionary or a journal or similar. I refuse to take the fact that you accept the word as evidence of its widespread acceptance, be you who you may.
Since your definition of 'word' varies from mine (which I'm sure we can both accept, although yours is perhaps the commoner), don't you think you should have cited a lexicon in which 'virii' occurs?
Your statement "Prescriptivist notions that some words are better than others are completely irrelevant to the question of wordhood" is one with which I generally agree, as should be evident from my post.
Where I take issue with you is first your claim that the word 'virii' is in common literate use (which is where you failed to provide authority, see above), and second in your use of 'Prescriptive' in your post and with the understanding of the question that that use implies.
No amount of assurances that all words are equal will diminish the unliterary, ahistorical provenance of 'virii', and for all its being a word of equal standing to the lexicographer; to me (and I believe to many in this community until I am persuaded otherwise) it possesses connotations of ignorance or carelessness. So while we may not censor it or strike it out of the dictionary should it appear in one, as I have no doubt it will, we certainly shouldn't use it ourselves.
This is probably funded under DARPA's Quantum Information Science and Technology Program.
Because the more accurately we know the funding the less accuratly we know the results?
Truly this is quantum computing.
Re:"ALLLOT" IS NOT A WORD!
on
60GB iPod Coming?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
I note you offer no credible authority for accepting 'virii', but rather confuse the question by defining 'register'. The state of the matter is the following.
The idea that something 'is a word' or 'is not a word' comes from an early stage in our education, when often we said things that 'weren't' words, like 'brung' and 'sheeps' and so forth. So now we have a definite idea about what 'is' or 'isn't' a word. Changes in our vocabulary and the vocabulary of those around us (think about moving from the UK to the US for instance) mean that we can't afford to adopt a rigid view of what 'is' or 'isn't' a word, since someday, we could wind up somewhere where everyone says 'embiggen', and then we'd look stupid not to use it ourselves.
On the other hand, while we are where we are, there are certain words, 'virii' being a case in point, which are only used by certain people, and not necessarily by a majority. We know that 'virii' is badly-formed, we don't have to use it, and I'm not alone in thinking less of people who use it. So although we can't say 'it isn't a word', we still shouldn't use it. There are plenty of other words which are best unused on slashdot, because they are obscene ('cunt'), or archaic ('purl'), or dialectal ('fleen'), or childish ('moocow') or oxymoronic ('microsoft works') or whatever.
When, in the 19th century, algebraists were faced with the problem of number-rings without unique factorisation for the first time, they invented a concept of 'ideal number' which was later reduced simply to 'ideal'. As a specific example: if we use Z[sqrt(-5)] as our ring, then 6 has two factorisations, as 2.3 and as [1+sqrt(-5)][1-sqrt(-5)]. You can check that 2,3, 1+sqrt(-5), 1-sqrt(-5) have no further factorisations. Hence 6 factors in 2 unrelated ways.
The solution to this problem is to associate 6 with the ideal (6) of all multiples of (6). Then (6) can be written uniquely as the product of 'prime ideal numbers' or 'prime ideals' as they are now called. See a book on commutative algebra for what the terms mean today.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone see the similarities between this and the idea that a 'dictatorship of the proletariat' is utopian?
I think that the best safeguard against trashy operating systems is healthy competition.
The proper term is 'symmteric' and not 'commutative'. One uses 'commutative' as a rule for operations and 'symmetric' for relations.
Monsters that use special attacks, like the Archvile
Any other monster, or just the Archvile? I've never seen this, in spite of having played level 20(?) of Plutonia, where you have a double-barrelled shotgun and like a zillion Archvilles.
I'm reasonably certain I've seen pain elementals attacked by their own Lost Souls, but it can be hard to keep track.
Also, I've never seen a monster with both contact and non-contact attacks get in a contact fight with its own species. (No Imp v. Imp, Hell Knight v. Hell Knight etc)
You see Lost Souls attacking each other all the time.
Also, he probably wants to mantain SCO's reputation as litigious bastards, to threaten people with later.
It's not like the Australins are the ones who decided to enact draconian IP legislation. Harmonised IP laws would be a good thing if the DMCA wasn't in force. As it is, this system will lead to easier trade between the US and Australia, because trading partners on both sides will have a better idea what's legal. Blame the Americans if what's legal also sucks.
And how many people have had their lives shortened by a lack of protein in the diet? On average, it seems to me, eating meat is probably better for you than not eating meat. Avoid beef if you want, but why should lamb/mutton be any safer? In the end, what should make the news are vitamin deficiencies, fatty diets, lack of protein, obesity, alcoholism, smoking, anemia etc. Not some disease that kills 150 people over 10 years, no matter how terrible the symptoms are.
Why doesn't one just test to see if the eye is in shadow, and if it is, add 1? Equivalently, one could have an extremely small region around the eye which is not in shadow, too small to affect anything else, but it should make the z-pass come out ok. Or am I missing something?
IBM, not Apple, have the best support, but by contrast they have poor overall reliability. Apple hardware is susceptible to the fewest failures of the hardware vendors reviewed, which is why they are top of the list.
Mod parent up. Also 'best selling author' means 'author who has published a best-seller'. Everyone knows this except you.
I use a (reasonably old) Nokia 3310, mostly because it does everything I want; but also because it has an excellent UI. It's consistent, and there are only four controlling buttons (left/down, up/right, return and cancel); this means that it's almost never hard to hit the one you want. More buttons in a small space and for a simple device only means more confusion.
Then again, I suppose a fair few people who think they need a 'powerful' phone will buy one with more buttons than there are stars in the sky...
Essentially, the IMO is a problem-solving competition in which the problems and their means of solution are mathematical.
Anyone looking for examples of the sort material covered by the IMO should check out Kalva.
I suppose my point here is that 'olympiad mathematics' is potentially a sport, in much the same sense that chess is; this doesn't mean that research mathematics is a sport at all.
I think a more interesting article would compare the number of revoked and narrowed patents to the number of patents which are enforced succesfully.
On a similar note, I'd like to know what percentage of patents are non-aggressive, either patents that are filed and never infringed or attacked, due to obscurity, or patents that are purely defensive. I'm sure no-one really cares about a large percentage of the 7,000,000 patents referred to.
I'm sure 2004 is the year of Linux on the Desktop!
Since `hobbyists' and students are willing to write software and release it for nothing, isn't it inefficient to pay people money to do the same thing? Granted, this may mean fewer jobs in software engineering, but this simply means technical people will work in other fields. Jobs don't simply disappear for ever when you cut redundancy; in fact, with fewer people tied up writing unnecessary code, the capacity of the economy to grow should increse.
Also, isn't discouraging open-source akin to protectionist economics, which have not been generally succesful? Gates is a free marketeer when it suits him, but here he's appealing to legislators and governments to protect his fledgeling, ailing, company. He sounds like a swindler to me.
Except of course that Microsoft should be bound by national and international law.
They aren't you know.
You are technically correct concerning the point that 'to my perspective' is used. You are foolish to use such a neologistic construction in this thread. Does this explain? I hope you see my post in the slightly sent-up spirit in which it was offered, and not simply as abusive.
And as for your remark that you read more than I do, it's simply insulting. I'd like you to withdraw it please. As we have discussed elsewhere, I accept many more things as valid English than I am prepared to write, whereas you have a marginally more liberal style.
I think you are still misreading me. I never said the word didn't exist. It does, and I do have a mental tab on it that says 'ungrammatical'. This much we both agree on.
And I say that this word is not used in the scientific literature, and I see you agree with this too. Therefore, I believe the word is out of place on such an intellectual site as this one, and to use it would make one seem illiterate
I now can tell (although we were previously at cross purposes) that do not disagree on the question of who uses the word.
Unless I am mistaken this debate hinges on whether one should use the word 'virii' on Slashdot; you say one should, since it's a word as good as any other, and I say one shouldn't, because it sounds illeterate in a literate context. Or is there something further I'm missing?
Although I am not a linguist, (as my misinterpretations of your terms has made clear), I have at least some familiarity with the history of English, and find your lessons on 'pea' a mite patronising. But I'm sure you'll forgive me that--- and withhold the one on 'bride'.
To say 'Unliterary provenance is the norm' seems to me to be a lie at worst, or a sleight of hand at best. Today, the majority of words entering the language arise in highly specialised fields, and therefore have a highly literary provenance.
Whereas you are right in saying that 'lamentable to my perspective' is grammatical, that's not to say that you don't look like a retard when you use a newfangled (and still slightly dubious) construction while being arch.
All the best.
I am afraid you misinterpret my use of 'authority'. By 'authority' I mean printed reference, such as a dictionary or a journal or similar. I refuse to take the fact that you accept the word as evidence of its widespread acceptance, be you who you may.
Since your definition of 'word' varies from mine (which I'm sure we can both accept, although yours is perhaps the commoner), don't you think you should have cited a lexicon in which 'virii' occurs?
Your statement "Prescriptivist notions that some words are better than others are completely irrelevant to the question of wordhood" is one with which I generally agree, as should be evident from my post.
Where I take issue with you is first your claim that the word 'virii' is in common literate use (which is where you failed to provide authority, see above), and second in your use of 'Prescriptive' in your post and with the understanding of the question that that use implies.
No amount of assurances that all words are equal will diminish the unliterary, ahistorical provenance of 'virii', and for all its being a word of equal standing to the lexicographer; to me (and I believe to many in this community until I am persuaded otherwise) it possesses connotations of ignorance or carelessness. So while we may not censor it or strike it out of the dictionary should it appear in one, as I have no doubt it will, we certainly shouldn't use it ourselves.
This is probably funded under DARPA's Quantum Information Science and Technology Program.
Because the more accurately we know the funding the less accuratly we know the results?
Truly this is quantum computing.
I note you offer no credible authority for accepting 'virii', but rather confuse the question by defining 'register'. The state of the matter is the following.
The idea that something 'is a word' or 'is not a word' comes from an early stage in our education, when often we said things that 'weren't' words, like 'brung' and 'sheeps' and so forth. So now we have a definite idea about what 'is' or 'isn't' a word. Changes in our vocabulary and the vocabulary of those around us (think about moving from the UK to the US for instance) mean that we can't afford to adopt a rigid view of what 'is' or 'isn't' a word, since someday, we could wind up somewhere where everyone says 'embiggen', and then we'd look stupid not to use it ourselves.
On the other hand, while we are where we are, there are certain words, 'virii' being a case in point, which are only used by certain people, and not necessarily by a majority. We know that 'virii' is badly-formed, we don't have to use it, and I'm not alone in thinking less of people who use it. So although we can't say 'it isn't a word', we still shouldn't use it. There are plenty of other words which are best unused on slashdot, because they are obscene ('cunt'), or archaic ('purl'), or dialectal ('fleen'), or childish ('moocow') or oxymoronic ('microsoft works') or whatever.
Lamentable from my perspective.
I'm sure that using 'guarantee' as a verb is not best usage. Why not 'assure'? Or 'give you a guarantee'?
They should use HFS+.
When, in the 19th century, algebraists were faced with the problem of number-rings without unique factorisation for the first time, they invented a concept of 'ideal number' which was later reduced simply to 'ideal'. As a specific example: if we use Z[sqrt(-5)] as our ring, then 6 has two factorisations, as 2.3 and as [1+sqrt(-5)][1-sqrt(-5)]. You can check that 2,3, 1+sqrt(-5), 1-sqrt(-5) have no further factorisations. Hence 6 factors in 2 unrelated ways.
The solution to this problem is to associate 6 with the ideal (6) of all multiples of (6). Then (6) can be written uniquely as the product of 'prime ideal numbers' or 'prime ideals' as they are now called. See a book on commutative algebra for what the terms mean today.