While I appreciate the nice reference, it's not nearly the same. It's a Service provider, which I know is easily confused with a back end provider but not nearly the same thing. Hell, you could easily set up your own business doing the same thing. Create a proxy and allow links to Big Bang theory, Atheism and while disallowing links to Creationist theory.. and call it "idontbelieve.com", I'm sure you would get subscribers.
A word of warning: Someone in the US probably has a patent on the idea so you may get sued in to poverty a Cambodian would not want.
Did you read the article? Shame on you if you have not. Listing ISP companies in the UK I find at least as many as we have in the US. Like AOL of old these companies use a different front end service that they control and larger ISP back ends. Maybe you have never heard of a HTTP Proxy, but in essence that is what this is.It's a voluntary service that they pay for, and a front end service at that. They mimic a different company that has been around for a while now called "TalkTalk" and add additional rules based on consumer input.
"Consumer input?"
Correct, it's a service geared toward consumers asking for enhancements based on their needs and beliefs.
"What a novel concept!"
Yeah, we used to have similar things in the US. Then atheist zealots got involved and started suing them, because the services that people paid for interfered with non-customers beliefs.
"Wait, people that were not customers were able to sue them and put them out of business for rules they did not even have to follow?"
That is correct. Welcome to America where the Constitution no longer matters.
Come now, a moment of sane thought please. It's one ISP in Britain, it's not massive censorship. I'm sure that this company has a selling point to consumers that they do just this sort of thing, so members knowingly choose this ISP to help manage content without them having to worry about monitoring nearly as much at home.
If a US company started (and they have by the way) which has a set of rules you don't like you change ISP companies right? I'm guessing that they have the same ability to change ISPs in the UK.
This is not as you say "changing the world" and there is no need to "leave the net alone" since they are not touching the net! They are creating a service very similar to Cyber Sitter or Net Nanny which used to be US companies (and maybe still are) that block content because customers pay them to.
I agree with the levers argument, but was there not also a lot of ergonomics work done with the QWERTY design in which the frequency of letters determined their position? Of course it was not called "ergonomics" back then, it was more practicality.
The same engineering used to facilitate lever flow means that the hands and fingers tend to work with each other pretty well. Most words require two hands to type and the most common characters tend to be placed at the strongest fingers.
I used to work with a guy that used, and swore by, the ergonomics of the Dvorak keyboard (I may have spelled it incorrectly). I grew up with QWERTY everything so when I saw the keyboard I was interested. I tried it, but found I could not use it. I don't look at keys when I type, which makes learning something new much harder. I know, showing my age here.. but in school we used the manual IBM typewriters and had to be able to copy 60WPM to pass the class. If you hunted and pecked keys, you flunked. From after that class, all reports had to be typed out on typewriter so the teaching stuck. Used to be they allowed no more than 2 corrections per page even, so 3 spots of white out could cost you a letter in grade.
I'm sure that the wheel could have been re-invented and better. But how much better could it be? I type on average about 80 words a minute, have no problems with special keys when programming, etc.. Would the new lay out gain me 1-2 words a minute and take me months to get the layout memorized so I'm not constantly making mistakes? That in my opinion is not worth making a change for.
I'm not sure it's being paranoid, maybe how the OT phrased it would be alarmist. Vague and misleading are nothing new when it comes to Law or Politics. I would agree with you that the wording is not as nefarious as the OT hints at it being. With that said, I think given everything going on in the US a dose healthy skepticism is a good thing.
The wording is subtle but there, I had to read the EO a few times to figure out where they got that statement. I'm to lazy to dig at the moment, but it's the part where it mentions using civilian property. In essence, "use civilian property" requires it to be seized. Such is the way of wording in Politics and Law, often vague or intentionally misleading.
Trap? Care to explain? You believe it's only 1 company responsible for the bad pharmaceuticals? Sorry, but there is just to much information regarding practices of numerous pharmaceutical companies, not just one. That does not count distribution chains either, that often purchase batches of bad things and resell them knowing they are bad.
And your argument against my logic is my signature? Ha ha, sorry dude that's funny. Next you will say I'm wrong because of my name or something. If you want to debate topics, stay on topic instead of resorting to Ad hominem attacks.
Fear? Do you bother to read anything that's going on? GMOs are killing people and making them sick, vaccines are killing people and making them sick, Monsanto is suing people that grow seeds that are not purchased from Monsanto, and if a seed happens to bloom a 2nd time they are suing them as well. This is causing food shortages and hardships for people that just want to eat dinner! Poland found that Monsanto corn KILLED bee populations in addition to only growing 1 time. Do you know the hardship and money this cost people just trying to grow food?
Look, if you were talking about teaching them to irrigate versus using a rain stick I could understand you claiming it is "fear of science". This is not quite so primitive or simply brushed off.
Remember something here: A lot of food and medicine that is rejected for use in the US ends up going overseas to "help" these poorer nations. Those rejects are not given away but are sold to keep profits high, and people end up suffering.
I'm not sure I agree with you. The anarchy is needed in my opinion to wake people up to the problems. Ghandi would never have been noticed if people were not already looking at the anarchy. Anarchy in this case is not simply chaos, it's an anti-establishment message.
To many of these people, they see 2 choices. Die trying to make things better or die doing nothing. The US is not far behind them either, don't be fooled by the lack of "News". Revolution has become a very popular word in the last few years and as more people wake up that will continue. Things will get much worse before they get better.
Darn it, stop making sense and rally against those pesky religious zealots!
Sarcasm aside, I agree with what you state. It's not just Monsanto either, it's also Pharma. Look at the massive rash of children in Cambodia and India now incapacitated and dieing from of all things.. Vaccines! Those are just the ones you can hear about if you go looking. Actually, I have to give a thumbs up to ABC that actually mentioned the problem in Cambodia this morning.
To take your statement a bit further, it's anti-corrupt-corporation. The corrupt are very corrupt, and it's causing tremendous amounts of human lives.
Wait, you believe that the EBS has the rights to seize property? Um, no it does not! They must have access to communications channels, but it does not have the right to seize property.
Where this is very different, is that now a department (at least 2 actually, the wording for who actually has authority is rather abstract) need no warrant and no legal judgement in order to seize property. There are zero definitions of what defines "communications", so servers, phones, buildings, homes, automobiles, etc.. can all be subject. There is no definition for continuity of executive communications, so the wording (while not seemingly nefarious) is extremely vague.
And of course if you don't like it, you have the last paragraph telling you to go pound sand up your ass and that it's for your own good. At least this is consistent with most executive orders.
(f) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
Have you seen "The Obama Deception" on youtube? I was going to type a long ass rant, but will save the trouble. Just watch that movie please.
Read this wonderful 2 thousand year old story. Then ask yourself why a majority of American's know more about Celebrities and Sports than they do about Politics. It is not a new story mind you, through history we have seen the same thing repeated over and over. It never ends well for the majority that get shammed by people in power.
There are so many indicators that we are in deep shit, yet very few will talk about them. These types of executive orders dismantling the constitution are not new, but recently they have been quite drastic. Corporate controlled media will not talk about them. I watch and listen to the "News", but can assure you that there is very little "News" to be found.
And I stand corrected: The actual sales and purchases were funded by the ATF, FBI, and who knows what else will be found. As the Government Agencies declare "Help, we need executive powers to stop them from looking in to us!" who knows how much we will be able to find. Right now, they are all extremely tight lipped and declaring everything they can touch as classified. What we are getting are leaks, the DOJ is just covering things up so nobody knows anything.
I normally ignore AC posts, but do want to point out that you are absolutely wrong about many things. I'd recommend that you go read the full brief of leaked documents, testimony, etc..
Now, as a matter of law: If the DOJ pays for John Doe to go in to a gun store and buy guns, then pays John Doe to sell those guns across the border, the DOJ is responsible right? Without the DOJ funding, it simply would not have happened. So you are absolutely wrong. The DOJ did sell guns to the drug cartels, the fact that they did so by proxy does not change that fact.
Next, what idiot in their right mind would believe this was "tracking", as was the cover up story given? There were no mechanisms in place to track anything. The only thing that could possibly be tracked were the John Doe people doing the leg work. These guns did not have serial numbers tracked to recipients nor did they have any homing devices installed. Anyone that knows illegal activity knows that the serial numbers are gone the minute someone buys them in Mexico. You have the same chance of tracking a stick as you do with tracking these guns. Ballistics will only work to track a gun _after_ it has been used, and even then would only be valid if they were used against your side! We don't have ballistics cops working in Mexico, and in fact Mexico had no idea this was happening and were not working in cooperation with the US DOJ.
How can you, and MSM claim this was just "stupid"? It was outright illegal and cost the lives of several hundred people in Mexico and a US Border agent. Stupid would have been being caught selling guns that back fired, or fell apart when they were fired.
Now, in addition to trying to find the documents here is a nice read for you.
I was replying to you. You gave an example which explains why we have increases or changes to words in the dictionary. Words are a part of a language, but grammar is not the same thing as words and spelling as you have implied. Grammar is also the rules in which words are structured to form thoughts.
Your statement does not explain why we have numerous correct ways of articulating the exact same thing in different methods. This is so that people can be as clear as possible. The rules for syntax rarely change, if they change at all.
To answer your question, it is estimated that 80-90% of our language is body language. It is extremely difficult to express those in writing. We have grammatical rules to help us with how we relay and receive those thoughts. It's not about new meanings, it's about expression of meaning so that you as a recipient understand, clearly, what I am thinking and trying to convey.
grammar/gramr/
Noun:
The whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including...
A particular analysis of the system and structure of language or of a specific language./quote
I have, and sometimes do still, intentionally play with variable names. I have mistyped variables just because people that would see or use the code have complained about receiving an email with a word spelled wrong. For internal tools, I also commonly use things like if(I_AM_SATAN), if(I_AM_STUPID), or while(I_AM_A_LAZY_PRICK) depending on who asked for a modification and why they asked for the modification.
Not always mind you, the mood has to strike me and the recipients have to be a good candidate. Of course there is that funny feeling after leaving a place, but I have never been emailed on tools I have written. Well, that's not quite true. I have been emailed with compliments and questions about how to make modifications or how to do something specific, but never has someone said anything about my use of naming.
I'm not saying that's the same with what you have seen, just pointing out that sometimes I have intentionally done those things. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone.
Aliens? Not exactly what I was thinking. I was thinking more along the lines of a covert program to get more DNA into Government databases, and of course the Government.. er Google... would make a lot of cash doing so.
I get that language, even what may be natively spoken, is complex. You assume a whole lot based on text which can be lost without vocal translation and body language, I get that also. At the same time, there are often numerous similar words that have different meaning for different context.
"Aww" would indicate whining. This is in addition to it being slang, and not available in most dictionaries.
"Awe" on the other hand is emotional and respectful. Try reading some literary works, it really helps to increase ones grammatical skills. I'd be willing to bet you could find numerous examples for the word "awe" used in very similar context to how I used it.
Are you confusing a dictionary with syntax? I'll agree that we create terminology as needed, but the rules of the language do not change the same way, nor nearly as quickly. "To to the car red go I now" is not suddenly proper English, it's poor grammar and does not follow grammatical rules even though the words are spelled correctly. Could you figure out what I meant? Of course after reading it and sorting it you could, assuming you natively spoke English. You on the other hand would probably wonder if the person that wrote it understood English language.
AFAIK, "hard-core pornography" is rather straight forward extension of "pornography" which does have a very fixed definition. Comparing that to "cool", which has numerous definitions and slang variations is not a fair comparison. It's kind of like saying "Poodles are to Dogs what Fruit is to Everything".
I get the point you are making, but don't agree it's a fair comparison. More simply: Law is always a matter of opinion. The opinion however must be clearly defined and regarding clearly defined subject matter. This is why we use so much case law today, it prevents having to re-define things over and over.
Pretty much, yeah you should not be telling a Frenchman anything in my opinion and here is why: You and I may not be politicians or mega billionaires, but how do you begin to fix problems with our own Government? Learn what our problems are, educate people to the problems, vote, and petition and force change. If we do nothing, or express apathy what will change? It's a matter of where we, as citizens, need to spend our energy or things can only get worse.
I read about new corruption every day, some dating back decades that I have never heard of. Example: Did you know that the US was using depleted uranium rounds all over the middle east and not just against armor as we were told? DU rounds have caused US citizens, that fight for your rights, to become extremely ill as well as the populations where the rounds were used. Did you know that in most cases, there were no clean up efforts and US Military people were not even told there was risk? That does not even consider the local populations that deal with this every day mind you.
I teach people things every day, or try. Most people have no idea what operation Fast and Furious was, let alone that there is currently no one being held accountable for selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels. I don't even get in to the part where it's shown in the leaked documents that it was expressly intended as an attack against the second amendment. Even though it's in the documents, people would immediately think "Conspiracy Theory" since they have been brain washed by the media in to thinking anyone talking bad about the US Government's actions must be a Conspiracy Theorist.
I write articles, and advocate for people to get involved. I'm guessing that I'm on Government watch lists for doing things like writing this post on/. Hell if you supported Ron Paul you were placed on a watch list, openly talking about the corruption must be way way worse.
It really bothers me that I fear my own Government even though I am expressing thoughts within my constitutional rights and am anything but against the USA. I think it's founding was the best thing that has happened in history as far as Governments go, and am a strong advocate for the Constitution and Bill of Rights . The reality is, this is the level of corruption we are dealing with. The corrupt don't care about the Constitution or the Bill of rights.
Back to my opinion: Go right ahead and bitch about a French military action to a Frenchman. Just don't bitch about losing money to an illegal bank action, since your energies were not spent where it may have made a difference.
The rule is fine, but the logic used is horrible. Instead of pointing out how obviously screwed up the patent system is, we see this: A special case exception based on an opinion, which is most obviously not law and can not be translated in to law!
Your way would work though not what I intended. My grammar was correct as posted.
awe/ô/
Noun:
A feeling of reverential respect mixed with fear or wonder: "they gazed in awe at the small mountain of diamonds".
I believe that "fear and wonder" describes very well how most people feel as they learn language(s). The sample sentence in the definition does not display the fear aspect at all.
You understand very correctly, but I guess it could be subjective. IP law in the US is horrid, unfair, costs society and our economy tremendous amounts of money. The EU has had a much better track record with IP, so I guess you could complain about the US's IP policies and laws. With that said, if your Government was full of corruption, you were fighting 2 legal wars and several illegal wars, News was reclassified as "Entertainment" (Thank you for that Supreme Court ruling by the way), and I could go on and on here but will save you the trouble... What does bitching about other people get you other than a distraction from your own problems? We have passed the point long ago where as citizens we should be worried about what other Governments are doing, at least in the US, and need to be worried about cleaning up our own act.
All citizens of every Government should consider that same thought.
Slashdot Mirror
While I appreciate the nice reference, it's not nearly the same. It's a Service provider, which I know is easily confused with a back end provider but not nearly the same thing. Hell, you could easily set up your own business doing the same thing. Create a proxy and allow links to Big Bang theory, Atheism and while disallowing links to Creationist theory.. and call it "idontbelieve.com", I'm sure you would get subscribers.
A word of warning: Someone in the US probably has a patent on the idea so you may get sued in to poverty a Cambodian would not want.
Did you read the article? Shame on you if you have not. Listing ISP companies in the UK I find at least as many as we have in the US. Like AOL of old these companies use a different front end service that they control and larger ISP back ends. Maybe you have never heard of a HTTP Proxy, but in essence that is what this is.It's a voluntary service that they pay for, and a front end service at that. They mimic a different company that has been around for a while now called "TalkTalk" and add additional rules based on consumer input.
"Consumer input?"
Correct, it's a service geared toward consumers asking for enhancements based on their needs and beliefs.
"What a novel concept!"
Yeah, we used to have similar things in the US. Then atheist zealots got involved and started suing them, because the services that people paid for interfered with non-customers beliefs.
"Wait, people that were not customers were able to sue them and put them out of business for rules they did not even have to follow?"
That is correct. Welcome to America where the Constitution no longer matters.
Come now, a moment of sane thought please. It's one ISP in Britain, it's not massive censorship. I'm sure that this company has a selling point to consumers that they do just this sort of thing, so members knowingly choose this ISP to help manage content without them having to worry about monitoring nearly as much at home.
If a US company started (and they have by the way) which has a set of rules you don't like you change ISP companies right? I'm guessing that they have the same ability to change ISPs in the UK.
This is not as you say "changing the world" and there is no need to "leave the net alone" since they are not touching the net! They are creating a service very similar to Cyber Sitter or Net Nanny which used to be US companies (and maybe still are) that block content because customers pay them to.
I agree with the levers argument, but was there not also a lot of ergonomics work done with the QWERTY design in which the frequency of letters determined their position? Of course it was not called "ergonomics" back then, it was more practicality.
The same engineering used to facilitate lever flow means that the hands and fingers tend to work with each other pretty well. Most words require two hands to type and the most common characters tend to be placed at the strongest fingers.
I used to work with a guy that used, and swore by, the ergonomics of the Dvorak keyboard (I may have spelled it incorrectly). I grew up with QWERTY everything so when I saw the keyboard I was interested. I tried it, but found I could not use it. I don't look at keys when I type, which makes learning something new much harder. I know, showing my age here.. but in school we used the manual IBM typewriters and had to be able to copy 60WPM to pass the class. If you hunted and pecked keys, you flunked. From after that class, all reports had to be typed out on typewriter so the teaching stuck. Used to be they allowed no more than 2 corrections per page even, so 3 spots of white out could cost you a letter in grade.
I'm sure that the wheel could have been re-invented and better. But how much better could it be? I type on average about 80 words a minute, have no problems with special keys when programming, etc.. Would the new lay out gain me 1-2 words a minute and take me months to get the layout memorized so I'm not constantly making mistakes? That in my opinion is not worth making a change for.
I'm not sure it's being paranoid, maybe how the OT phrased it would be alarmist. Vague and misleading are nothing new when it comes to Law or Politics. I would agree with you that the wording is not as nefarious as the OT hints at it being. With that said, I think given everything going on in the US a dose healthy skepticism is a good thing.
The wording is subtle but there, I had to read the EO a few times to figure out where they got that statement. I'm to lazy to dig at the moment, but it's the part where it mentions using civilian property. In essence, "use civilian property" requires it to be seized. Such is the way of wording in Politics and Law, often vague or intentionally misleading.
Trap? Care to explain? You believe it's only 1 company responsible for the bad pharmaceuticals? Sorry, but there is just to much information regarding practices of numerous pharmaceutical companies, not just one. That does not count distribution chains either, that often purchase batches of bad things and resell them knowing they are bad.
And your argument against my logic is my signature? Ha ha, sorry dude that's funny. Next you will say I'm wrong because of my name or something. If you want to debate topics, stay on topic instead of resorting to Ad hominem attacks.
Fear? Do you bother to read anything that's going on? GMOs are killing people and making them sick, vaccines are killing people and making them sick, Monsanto is suing people that grow seeds that are not purchased from Monsanto, and if a seed happens to bloom a 2nd time they are suing them as well. This is causing food shortages and hardships for people that just want to eat dinner! Poland found that Monsanto corn KILLED bee populations in addition to only growing 1 time. Do you know the hardship and money this cost people just trying to grow food?
Look, if you were talking about teaching them to irrigate versus using a rain stick I could understand you claiming it is "fear of science". This is not quite so primitive or simply brushed off.
Remember something here: A lot of food and medicine that is rejected for use in the US ends up going overseas to "help" these poorer nations. Those rejects are not given away but are sold to keep profits high, and people end up suffering.
I'm not sure I agree with you. The anarchy is needed in my opinion to wake people up to the problems. Ghandi would never have been noticed if people were not already looking at the anarchy. Anarchy in this case is not simply chaos, it's an anti-establishment message.
To many of these people, they see 2 choices. Die trying to make things better or die doing nothing. The US is not far behind them either, don't be fooled by the lack of "News". Revolution has become a very popular word in the last few years and as more people wake up that will continue. Things will get much worse before they get better.
Darn it, stop making sense and rally against those pesky religious zealots!
Sarcasm aside, I agree with what you state. It's not just Monsanto either, it's also Pharma. Look at the massive rash of children in Cambodia and India now incapacitated and dieing from of all things.. Vaccines! Those are just the ones you can hear about if you go looking. Actually, I have to give a thumbs up to ABC that actually mentioned the problem in Cambodia this morning.
To take your statement a bit further, it's anti-corrupt-corporation. The corrupt are very corrupt, and it's causing tremendous amounts of human lives.
Wait, you believe that the EBS has the rights to seize property? Um, no it does not! They must have access to communications channels, but it does not have the right to seize property.
Where this is very different, is that now a department (at least 2 actually, the wording for who actually has authority is rather abstract) need no warrant and no legal judgement in order to seize property. There are zero definitions of what defines "communications", so servers, phones, buildings, homes, automobiles, etc.. can all be subject. There is no definition for continuity of executive communications, so the wording (while not seemingly nefarious) is extremely vague.
And of course if you don't like it, you have the last paragraph telling you to go pound sand up your ass and that it's for your own good. At least this is consistent with most executive orders.
(f) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
You believe they are actually on different teams?
Have you seen "The Obama Deception" on youtube? I was going to type a long ass rant, but will save the trouble. Just watch that movie please.
Read this wonderful 2 thousand year old story. Then ask yourself why a majority of American's know more about Celebrities and Sports than they do about Politics. It is not a new story mind you, through history we have seen the same thing repeated over and over. It never ends well for the majority that get shammed by people in power.
There are so many indicators that we are in deep shit, yet very few will talk about them. These types of executive orders dismantling the constitution are not new, but recently they have been quite drastic. Corporate controlled media will not talk about them. I watch and listen to the "News", but can assure you that there is very little "News" to be found.
And I stand corrected: The actual sales and purchases were funded by the ATF, FBI, and who knows what else will be found. As the Government Agencies declare "Help, we need executive powers to stop them from looking in to us!" who knows how much we will be able to find. Right now, they are all extremely tight lipped and declaring everything they can touch as classified. What we are getting are leaks, the DOJ is just covering things up so nobody knows anything.
I normally ignore AC posts, but do want to point out that you are absolutely wrong about many things. I'd recommend that you go read the full brief of leaked documents, testimony, etc..
Now, as a matter of law: If the DOJ pays for John Doe to go in to a gun store and buy guns, then pays John Doe to sell those guns across the border, the DOJ is responsible right? Without the DOJ funding, it simply would not have happened. So you are absolutely wrong. The DOJ did sell guns to the drug cartels, the fact that they did so by proxy does not change that fact.
Next, what idiot in their right mind would believe this was "tracking", as was the cover up story given? There were no mechanisms in place to track anything. The only thing that could possibly be tracked were the John Doe people doing the leg work. These guns did not have serial numbers tracked to recipients nor did they have any homing devices installed. Anyone that knows illegal activity knows that the serial numbers are gone the minute someone buys them in Mexico. You have the same chance of tracking a stick as you do with tracking these guns. Ballistics will only work to track a gun _after_ it has been used, and even then would only be valid if they were used against your side! We don't have ballistics cops working in Mexico, and in fact Mexico had no idea this was happening and were not working in cooperation with the US DOJ.
How can you, and MSM claim this was just "stupid"? It was outright illegal and cost the lives of several hundred people in Mexico and a US Border agent. Stupid would have been being caught selling guns that back fired, or fell apart when they were fired.
Now, in addition to trying to find the documents here is a nice read for you.
I was replying to you. You gave an example which explains why we have increases or changes to words in the dictionary. Words are a part of a language, but grammar is not the same thing as words and spelling as you have implied. Grammar is also the rules in which words are structured to form thoughts.
Your statement does not explain why we have numerous correct ways of articulating the exact same thing in different methods. This is so that people can be as clear as possible. The rules for syntax rarely change, if they change at all.
To answer your question, it is estimated that 80-90% of our language is body language. It is extremely difficult to express those in writing. We have grammatical rules to help us with how we relay and receive those thoughts. It's not about new meanings, it's about expression of meaning so that you as a recipient understand, clearly, what I am thinking and trying to convey.
grammar/gramr/ Noun:
The whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including... A particular analysis of the system and structure of language or of a specific language./quote
I have, and sometimes do still, intentionally play with variable names. I have mistyped variables just because people that would see or use the code have complained about receiving an email with a word spelled wrong. For internal tools, I also commonly use things like if(I_AM_SATAN), if(I_AM_STUPID), or while(I_AM_A_LAZY_PRICK) depending on who asked for a modification and why they asked for the modification.
Not always mind you, the mood has to strike me and the recipients have to be a good candidate. Of course there is that funny feeling after leaving a place, but I have never been emailed on tools I have written. Well, that's not quite true. I have been emailed with compliments and questions about how to make modifications or how to do something specific, but never has someone said anything about my use of naming.
I'm not saying that's the same with what you have seen, just pointing out that sometimes I have intentionally done those things. I'm pretty sure I'm not alone.
Aliens? Not exactly what I was thinking. I was thinking more along the lines of a covert program to get more DNA into Government databases, and of course the Government.. er Google... would make a lot of cash doing so.
I get that language, even what may be natively spoken, is complex. You assume a whole lot based on text which can be lost without vocal translation and body language, I get that also. At the same time, there are often numerous similar words that have different meaning for different context.
"Aww" would indicate whining. This is in addition to it being slang, and not available in most dictionaries.
"Awe" on the other hand is emotional and respectful. Try reading some literary works, it really helps to increase ones grammatical skills. I'd be willing to bet you could find numerous examples for the word "awe" used in very similar context to how I used it.
Are you confusing a dictionary with syntax? I'll agree that we create terminology as needed, but the rules of the language do not change the same way, nor nearly as quickly. "To to the car red go I now" is not suddenly proper English, it's poor grammar and does not follow grammatical rules even though the words are spelled correctly. Could you figure out what I meant? Of course after reading it and sorting it you could, assuming you natively spoke English. You on the other hand would probably wonder if the person that wrote it understood English language.
You could have at least had the decency of asking "Is you related to Bill Clinton?" to which I may have replied...
AFAIK, "hard-core pornography" is rather straight forward extension of "pornography" which does have a very fixed definition. Comparing that to "cool", which has numerous definitions and slang variations is not a fair comparison. It's kind of like saying "Poodles are to Dogs what Fruit is to Everything".
I get the point you are making, but don't agree it's a fair comparison. More simply: Law is always a matter of opinion. The opinion however must be clearly defined and regarding clearly defined subject matter. This is why we use so much case law today, it prevents having to re-define things over and over.
Pretty much, yeah you should not be telling a Frenchman anything in my opinion and here is why: You and I may not be politicians or mega billionaires, but how do you begin to fix problems with our own Government? Learn what our problems are, educate people to the problems, vote, and petition and force change. If we do nothing, or express apathy what will change? It's a matter of where we, as citizens, need to spend our energy or things can only get worse.
I read about new corruption every day, some dating back decades that I have never heard of. Example: Did you know that the US was using depleted uranium rounds all over the middle east and not just against armor as we were told? DU rounds have caused US citizens, that fight for your rights, to become extremely ill as well as the populations where the rounds were used. Did you know that in most cases, there were no clean up efforts and US Military people were not even told there was risk? That does not even consider the local populations that deal with this every day mind you.
I teach people things every day, or try. Most people have no idea what operation Fast and Furious was, let alone that there is currently no one being held accountable for selling weapons to Mexican drug cartels. I don't even get in to the part where it's shown in the leaked documents that it was expressly intended as an attack against the second amendment. Even though it's in the documents, people would immediately think "Conspiracy Theory" since they have been brain washed by the media in to thinking anyone talking bad about the US Government's actions must be a Conspiracy Theorist.
I write articles, and advocate for people to get involved. I'm guessing that I'm on Government watch lists for doing things like writing this post on /. Hell if you supported Ron Paul you were placed on a watch list, openly talking about the corruption must be way way worse.
It really bothers me that I fear my own Government even though I am expressing thoughts within my constitutional rights and am anything but against the USA. I think it's founding was the best thing that has happened in history as far as Governments go, and am a strong advocate for the Constitution and Bill of Rights . The reality is, this is the level of corruption we are dealing with. The corrupt don't care about the Constitution or the Bill of rights.
Back to my opinion: Go right ahead and bitch about a French military action to a Frenchman. Just don't bitch about losing money to an illegal bank action, since your energies were not spent where it may have made a difference.
The rule is fine, but the logic used is horrible. Instead of pointing out how obviously screwed up the patent system is, we see this: A special case exception based on an opinion, which is most obviously not law and can not be translated in to law!
Your way would work though not what I intended. My grammar was correct as posted.
awe/ô/ Noun: A feeling of reverential respect mixed with fear or wonder: "they gazed in awe at the small mountain of diamonds".
I believe that "fear and wonder" describes very well how most people feel as they learn language(s). The sample sentence in the definition does not display the fear aspect at all.
You understand very correctly, but I guess it could be subjective. IP law in the US is horrid, unfair, costs society and our economy tremendous amounts of money. The EU has had a much better track record with IP, so I guess you could complain about the US's IP policies and laws. With that said, if your Government was full of corruption, you were fighting 2 legal wars and several illegal wars, News was reclassified as "Entertainment" (Thank you for that Supreme Court ruling by the way), and I could go on and on here but will save you the trouble... What does bitching about other people get you other than a distraction from your own problems? We have passed the point long ago where as citizens we should be worried about what other Governments are doing, at least in the US, and need to be worried about cleaning up our own act.
All citizens of every Government should consider that same thought.