An artificial intelligence could also be based on the same substrate as we are -- neurons. They would just be artificially grown and arranged by us. That deals with Penrose too.
... though try getting Penrose to agree with that:-)
... nam qui dabat olim
imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se
continet atque duas tantum res anxius optat:
panem et circenses.
Juvenal, Satire 10.78-81. "For the people, who once assigned authority, political offices, legions, everything, now represses itself, and desires and gets troubled over just two businesses: bread and circuses."
A most authoritative and well-referenced link, thank you. But you're all wrong about what irony is. It's like brassy and coppery, except it's made of iron.
(PS: ed- also < edo edere edi editum with a long ê, "to publish or prepare for publication", i.e. edit, hence êditor = "one who edits or publishes", as opposed to esor "one who eats".)
The funny thing about all of this is that, on the whole, I think your conclusion is correct, it just does not follow from this specific line of reasoning. My point was that a comparison of the Vista beta with Debian testing is unfair, especially when the driver model was changed for Vista.
Hmmm -- I think it does follow, actually. You (rightly, I think) refuse to equate public testing with private in-house testing, and that seems to me to have an inescapable conclusion: one is clearly more valuable and effective than the other. Ah well, not that it matters -- I guess that's an academic point too.
Why are you flaming someone for poor English when English is obviously not his native language? I respectfully suggest that until you write a decent tech article in Slovenian and submit it to this guy for him to tear to shreds (and, incidentally, learn what a split infinitive is), you should shut the hell up.
And Vista has been in development for what FIVE years? Hmmmmm...
So five years in private development somehow equals three years in public testing and development?
Seems to me like the obvious conclusion to take from these comments is that the proprietary OS is always, inevitably, going to be the less reliable one. You've certainly demonstrated that, compared with that criterion, it's purely academic whether Microsoft has been competent or not.
I think you need to learn that tastes vary greatly. Some books have something for everyone; others (like Moby Dick) have something for only a tiny fraction of potential readers. I can't imagine ever recommending Moby Dick to anyone, but there isn't a soul to whom I wouldn't recommend the Aeneid -- because it's got something for everyone, university professors and teenagers looking for an outlet for violent feelings alike. I'm sure you can think of other examples.
I was never made to read Moby Dick in school, as I don't live in the US; but if there is such a need for American novels in American schools, surely there's no shortage of alternatives? Isn't Catcher in the Rye widely read? What about Bonfire of the Vanities or Catch-22? Or are they generally considered "inappropriate for children"? Heh, I wouldn't be surprised.
Fortunately there are many different kinds of classics. I also find Moby Dick as dull as ditchwater (after the first chapter; I can't believe I once wasted a month's worth of free time ploughing through that drivel). Fortunately for people with our taste, there also exist classics like Catch-22, the Odyssey, Tom Jones, and the first half of Paradise Lost. If the dreck they teach in high schools isn't to your taste, there's no shortage of alternatives.
One convention among linguists is to consider two dialects or idiolects to be separate languages iff they are mutually incomprehensible. This works in some cases and falls down badly in others. By this standard Scots, especially Glaswegian Scots, counts as a separate language from English (and fair enough); on the other hand Flemish and Dutch don't count as separate languages (possibly also fair enough); on the other other hand, this criterion leads to having about a dozen different languages spoken in Germany (possibly also fair enough); and other anomalies which different people might approve of or not as the case might be. Anyway, the short answer is yes, but considering different Englishes as "dialects" is usually more appropriate.
Thanks for attracting my attention to this bit (which comes from the Peoria Journal Star article, by the way) --
Or have no idea about extreme basics like nouns and verbs, and why one of each must be in every sentence.
Oh the irony. (Hint: does his sentence have a subject? why no it doesn't.)
In any case, he's wrong. They needn't be. (Hint: count the nouns in the previous sentence.)
Is my point that Phil Luciano's English is at least as bad as his targets? Well, yes, it is: that seems fair to me. This from a guy who claims "I teach college English". Er, good one mate, you're certainly helping...
Sorry for the delay in replying. The answer is yes, I can provide citations (below) to confirm that the change in right-click behaviour was intentional. None of them specify Microsoft Word as the model, but most comments use phrases like "All Applications I know on Windows move the text cursor to the right click position", "people are used to a different behaviour from other applications", etc., which are manifestly untrue. The issues in which the change was requested are as follows -- I may have missed some -- complete with (I think inane) discussion:
Only the last one actually describes a specific situation where the change would be useful. I have in my turn requested that 1.x-like right click behaviour be enabled as an option (issue 63188). It hasn't been closed yet, which I suppose is a good sign.
IMHO, some of the problems in OOo 2.x are results of trying to change away from OOo 1.x to become more Microsoft-like. Example: right-click behaviour. In most applications, when you right-click, a context menu comes up for whatever you've got selected at the moment. In Word, though, right-clicking moves the selection before bringing up a context menu. Therefore, OOo 2.x got changed to behave like that too.
Sometimes it's for the better, e.g. OOo 2.x's ability to do word-counts on just selected text. A Microsoft-inspired change that would be really useful would be the ability to find-and-replace paragraph breaks: to do this currently, I actually have to save in.doc format and do the find-and-replace in Word, which I hate -- not just because I hate Word (though I do), but also because it messes up the styles.
I also find OOo 2.x significantly buggier than OOo 1.x: e.g. the fact that you have to hit alt twice to bring up a menu in Impress; numerous layout bugs with text that uses multiple alphabets (which I have reported; one even got fixed in 2.0.2, though the others have been ignored so far). For the sake of stability, I often wish I were still working with 1.1.5 rather than 2.x, in spite of its missing a few features; the OpenDocument write support is the main one that keeps me on 2.x.
Yes, OOo has its problems. But I'd never willingly go back to Microsoft Office.
Another point here is that Google offers an international service. Even if some judge does rule that Google has to, for example, keep program searches from turning up toolbar results for the cracks to those programs, this ruling would only be in effect in the US.
This is, I am afraid, incorrect. Google is a US company, and censors according to the requirements of US law everywhere (though in some countries it censors under local laws too, as in the cases of China, France, and Germany). Google.cn, google.de, google.fr, google.co.nz, etc etc, all censor the same results that get censored in the US, complete with the standard DMCA notice, even though the DMCA is not in effect in any of those countries. I contacted Google about this when I noticed it, and they pretty quickly confirmed that this is indeed the case.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention that the phrase "Obviously Oracle is pissed" would take on a wholly different meaning in UK English. (Possibly still accurate, though?)
Why would someone write a song with a line that goes "the the the the"?
6. Cthool-hoo. Why the extra syllable?
Public humiliation is what you're talking about, but I prefer it your way.
... though try getting Penrose to agree with that :-)
Juvenal, Satire 10.78-81. "For the people, who once assigned authority, political offices, legions, everything, now represses itself, and desires and gets troubled over just two businesses: bread and circuses."
A most authoritative and well-referenced link, thank you. But you're all wrong about what irony is. It's like brassy and coppery, except it's made of iron.
Simultaneously, actually. Just a very minor point, I know. :-)
OK I've done enough damage for one day. Please forgive me.
In other words:
emax, emacis, n. 3rd decl. f.
(PS: ed- also < edo edere edi editum with a long ê, "to publish or prepare for publication", i.e. edit, hence êditor = "one who edits or publishes", as opposed to esor "one who eats".)
Brave New World works too, but remember the bit in 1984 where Winston's neighbour gets ratted out to the Thought Police by .... his children?
Thank you! -- for ending my work day on an out-loud laugh.
Hmmm -- I think it does follow, actually. You (rightly, I think) refuse to equate public testing with private in-house testing, and that seems to me to have an inescapable conclusion: one is clearly more valuable and effective than the other. Ah well, not that it matters -- I guess that's an academic point too.
Why are you flaming someone for poor English when English is obviously not his native language? I respectfully suggest that until you write a decent tech article in Slovenian and submit it to this guy for him to tear to shreds (and, incidentally, learn what a split infinitive is), you should shut the hell up.
Seems to me like the obvious conclusion to take from these comments is that the proprietary OS is always, inevitably, going to be the less reliable one. You've certainly demonstrated that, compared with that criterion, it's purely academic whether Microsoft has been competent or not.
Yes. Copyright infringement should be a civil matter, and not a criminal offence. Funny, I seem to recall that's how things actually once were.
Hmmmm yes, raiding people's homes is clearly a fair and balanced response to allegations of copyright infringement.
I was never made to read Moby Dick in school, as I don't live in the US; but if there is such a need for American novels in American schools, surely there's no shortage of alternatives? Isn't Catcher in the Rye widely read? What about Bonfire of the Vanities or Catch-22? Or are they generally considered "inappropriate for children"? Heh, I wouldn't be surprised.
Fortunately there are many different kinds of classics. I also find Moby Dick as dull as ditchwater (after the first chapter; I can't believe I once wasted a month's worth of free time ploughing through that drivel). Fortunately for people with our taste, there also exist classics like Catch-22, the Odyssey, Tom Jones, and the first half of Paradise Lost. If the dreck they teach in high schools isn't to your taste, there's no shortage of alternatives.
One convention among linguists is to consider two dialects or idiolects to be separate languages iff they are mutually incomprehensible. This works in some cases and falls down badly in others. By this standard Scots, especially Glaswegian Scots, counts as a separate language from English (and fair enough); on the other hand Flemish and Dutch don't count as separate languages (possibly also fair enough); on the other other hand, this criterion leads to having about a dozen different languages spoken in Germany (possibly also fair enough); and other anomalies which different people might approve of or not as the case might be. Anyway, the short answer is yes, but considering different Englishes as "dialects" is usually more appropriate.
Thanks for attracting my attention to this bit (which comes from the Peoria Journal Star article, by the way) --
Oh the irony. (Hint: does his sentence have a subject? why no it doesn't.)
In any case, he's wrong. They needn't be. (Hint: count the nouns in the previous sentence.)
Is my point that Phil Luciano's English is at least as bad as his targets? Well, yes, it is: that seems fair to me. This from a guy who claims "I teach college English". Er, good one mate, you're certainly helping ...
Sorry for the delay in replying. The answer is yes, I can provide citations (below) to confirm that the change in right-click behaviour was intentional. None of them specify Microsoft Word as the model, but most comments use phrases like "All Applications I know on Windows move the text cursor to the right click position", "people are used to a different behaviour from other applications", etc., which are manifestly untrue. The issues in which the change was requested are as follows -- I may have missed some -- complete with (I think inane) discussion:
Only the last one actually describes a specific situation where the change would be useful. I have in my turn requested that 1.x-like right click behaviour be enabled as an option (issue 63188). It hasn't been closed yet, which I suppose is a good sign.
I know an AC has already replied to your sig, but I'm curious: in your sig, is "America" vocative or accusative? (I approve either way.)
IMHO, some of the problems in OOo 2.x are results of trying to change away from OOo 1.x to become more Microsoft-like. Example: right-click behaviour. In most applications, when you right-click, a context menu comes up for whatever you've got selected at the moment. In Word, though, right-clicking moves the selection before bringing up a context menu. Therefore, OOo 2.x got changed to behave like that too.
Sometimes it's for the better, e.g. OOo 2.x's ability to do word-counts on just selected text. A Microsoft-inspired change that would be really useful would be the ability to find-and-replace paragraph breaks: to do this currently, I actually have to save in .doc format and do the find-and-replace in Word, which I hate -- not just because I hate Word (though I do), but also because it messes up the styles.
I also find OOo 2.x significantly buggier than OOo 1.x: e.g. the fact that you have to hit alt twice to bring up a menu in Impress; numerous layout bugs with text that uses multiple alphabets (which I have reported; one even got fixed in 2.0.2, though the others have been ignored so far). For the sake of stability, I often wish I were still working with 1.1.5 rather than 2.x, in spite of its missing a few features; the OpenDocument write support is the main one that keeps me on 2.x.
Yes, OOo has its problems. But I'd never willingly go back to Microsoft Office.
This is, I am afraid, incorrect. Google is a US company, and censors according to the requirements of US law everywhere (though in some countries it censors under local laws too, as in the cases of China, France, and Germany). Google.cn, google.de, google.fr, google.co.nz, etc etc, all censor the same results that get censored in the US, complete with the standard DMCA notice, even though the DMCA is not in effect in any of those countries. I contacted Google about this when I noticed it, and they pretty quickly confirmed that this is indeed the case.