You cannot write down a word you are shown without a dictionary?
You cannot comprehend basic English?
are you implying you can write down a made-up word like "qwaagul"
I can, but if it's obfuscated[1] how can I be sure it isn't meant to say quaagul, or gwaaqal...? Natural language has redundancy, which usually enables some form of error corection/detection.
but somehow you can't write down "misericord" without looking it up in the dictionary?
If it's not in clearly legible form[2] how am I supposed to know whether I should type nisericord, misericard etc unless I already know the word? If my native language is Russian and/or I'm not a fan of ecclesiastical architecture chances are I won't.
[1] newsflash - captchas usually are. [2] you're clearly having trouble with this concept.
I guess you're very young and used to digital-to-digital copies, which are an exact replica. But back in those days, 6000 years ago if I remember right, it was all analog and a certain amount of degradation's to be expected.
Can someone please explain to me why allegedly prestigious law firms would use anonymous and clearly libelous postings as any sort of basis to decide whether to employ someone?
Because everyone knows astrology is bunk, and graphology is so 1990s?
Am I the only one who doesn't like the idea of my files being transparently loaded anywhere? Call me a luddite but I'd rather have that under my manual control - I assume this isn't possible as the camera would have to provide the controls/UI.
Navigating sites in foreign languages is also a skill that does not necessarily need proficiency in the language used.
What solving captchas - at least real word ones - does require is a sizeable vocabulary. While that isn't the same as proficiency, the two generally go together.
In India, we are free to express and actively promote our views - and that includes morons such as these RSS guys.
When most people hear the phrase "actively promote" they'd think you mean freedom of speech. What your pals in the RSS are doing is violent coercion. Nice sleight of hand equating the two, but no cigar.
In some parts of England, "graft" means hard work rather than the modern American meaning relating to corruption. This could easily lead to confusion and ambiguity, and yet in this case it doesn't. Puzzling, most puzzling.
So what they're saying is that if you create a machine that interactively models some activity or situation, people can practice and try things out without the consequences that happen doing it for real. By doing this they can develop their skills and knowledge and later apply them to the real task.
This is a brilliant idea. I can see it going a long way. Pilot training is the first thing that springs to mind. I'm just surprised nobody thought of it before.
Slashdot Mirror
[1] newsflash - captchas usually are.
[2] you're clearly having trouble with this concept.
How does that help? There could be hundreds of access points with the same IP address, especially if the factory default is 192.168.X.Y
I guess you're very young and used to digital-to-digital copies, which are an exact replica. But back in those days, 6000 years ago if I remember right, it was all analog and a certain amount of degradation's to be expected.
Am I the only one who doesn't like the idea of my files being transparently loaded anywhere? Call me a luddite but I'd rather have that under my manual control - I assume this isn't possible as the camera would have to provide the controls/UI.
It's "cue", FFS.
Anyone else remember the bad old days when slash was just old digg stories reposted? At least now we get some variety...
So what they're saying is that if you create a machine that interactively models some activity or situation, people can practice and try things out without the consequences that happen doing it for real. By doing this they can develop their skills and knowledge and later apply them to the real task.
This is a brilliant idea. I can see it going a long way. Pilot training is the first thing that springs to mind. I'm just surprised nobody thought of it before.
You're probably right, but in any case, the editor should have corrected it. On second thoughts, maybe he did.
Belgian: (a) Of, from, or pertaining to said country. (n) An inhabitant or citizen thereof.
Hey, it's the 21st century - put them all in your blog.
The headline says they won't sue, but the article says they have no immediate plans to do so. Those are not the same thing.
Standards are great, you can never have too many of them.
Quoth TFS: "Intel has designed and begun marketing it's own low-cost laptop".
Does it have a preinstalled grammar checker?