You're exactly right- there is no direct equivalent in English. In fact, it's impossible to describe the sound with any sort of accuracy to someone who's never heard it, or never known they heard it. I had this discussion with one of the guys from my German classes, and the best thing he could come up with was it's like the u in lute, but not like the oo in loot, as much sense as that makes.
Ok, sounds good. Now write that concisely, in such a way that an American can pronounce it first shot. You don't honestly believe that I think "oe" goes exactly to "oo," do you?
Speaking of the German R, I have a friend who studied abroad in Austria last semester. Everyone he met thought he had a Spanish accent. He couldn't figure out why. It turned out that he was compensating for that nice round American "r" sound by rolling his Rs exactly as they do in Spanish, with the tongue against the hard palatte, instead of making the sound with the softer tissues to the back (which is difficult indeed).
Ja, ich bin sicher, und habe seit zwei Jahre Deutsch studiert.
Note that the "oo" is an approximation; Slashdot doesn't like IPA characters (as local comments illustrate). I didn't say his name ought to be exactly "grooning," I said something like "grooning." Besides, it seems that it isn't German after all and rhymes with "raining."
Indeed. My accent can't decide where to be from, and I tend to switch back and forth between North German and Viennese frequently, often within the same sentence, depending on which professor or band I learned a word from. The o-umlaut pronunciation is from Rammstein's "Zerstoeren," where the title word is quite clearly pronounced "Tserstooooo-ren."
The "oe," "ae," and "ue" in English are often representations of the German ö, ä, and ü characters. If Matt Groenings name is such a case, it would be pronounced about like "groon-ing."
Hours per player, original EQ might win. Gross hours played, though, WOW has so many more players that even if they were all casual occasional gamers whose internet only worked for five minutes each day while the big dipper was properly aligned, WOW would win hands down.
Evidence? 'Cause I've got mine. Just because something makes sense at first glance (more money == better schools! smaller classes == better performance!) doesn't make it true.
His point is that there's an excess of fibers, and we don't need to recycle paper to keep up paper production. It's not like we're recycling paper to keep from running out.
Please- throwing money at education is not the solution. Poorly-performing inner city public shools receive more money per head than well-performing private schools. Besides, building in additional expense would just increase the cost of the lawsuit. If you're hoping to discourage massive lawsuits in general, this is a bad way to do it. If you're trying to discourage only the frivolous sort, you should realize that while this is slashdot and Microsoft is evilbadsuperdumb, they might well have a legit case.
You can also visit history and see the immense resources squandered on dead-ends, misconceptions, and wishful thinking: everything from alchemy to Stalinism. Alchemy? Oh, you mean chemistry.
Your original point stands, though. Historical progress doesn't erase historical mistakes.
Here is one: if I make a mistake, and send myself a message into the past saying "don't make this mistake," and hence I don't make the mistake, I have just destroyed my incentive to send the message. But what if you send the message anyway, remembering that it was the reason you avoided the mistake in the first^h^h^h^h^hsecond^h^h^h^h^hthird^h^h^h^h^hohda mnit place?
The biggest contribution on the list is $9000; most are $2000 or less. If you knew about the public opinion on the RIAA, why would you take money from them? It seems like the negative publicity f having taken money would outweigh whatever you could do with the money.
I'd argue that you yourself, anonymous coward, are also merely a very deeply iterated switch statement, as am I, and everyone around us. Where in your thought process does anything other than brain hardware and past experience enter into the equation?
It's funny, you have Playstation 3 syndrome. It is not enough that the game be fun and the art be well designed, but must also utilize UBER RAY TRACED PARALLAX SHADER MAPPING and other "next gen" techniques.
It seems that most consumers have this "Playstation 3 syndrome." I enjoy The Battle for Wesnoth, but that doesn't mean that it could sell copies like God of War. Given that the topic regards game development, perhaps for deployment, PS3 syndrome may be something that he has to deal with.
It is indeed a non-libertarian document, and was illegally drafted in secret. Thomas Jefferson protested it severely. The articles of confederation would have been much, much better.
It seems that "insightful" is still the default "I agree" mod. The argument that Ron Paul is a racist has nothing to do with any actual evidence of racism; he's against federal , and this includes meaningless federal dollars to minorities. Ditto homophobia; the votes in question were against federal funding to encourage homosexual couples to adopt children and against a federal-level "gays can always marry in the US" bill, not against homosexuals. Ron Paul is in favor of the government getting its nose out of marriage completely. Needless knee-jerk reactions and refusals to believe that anyone other than a Democrat (or a Republican) can do anything right? Not terribly insightful in my book.
Yes, but it says later that while they are often treated as synonymous, they are different. Computational means that we're using computers to study , within the classical scientific method: hypothesize, test, observe, refine, grant money, ???, profit (except that we have to use a computer somewhere). Bioinformatics is more about modeling things inside the computer, and doesn't have any real-world parts: your bacteria/proteins/virii exist only as bits. If you use the terms interchangeably nobody will think you're an idiot.
Slashdot Mirror
Your darn right it's a biological imperative. I can't get anyone to have sex and continue the species without privacy!
You're exactly right- there is no direct equivalent in English. In fact, it's impossible to describe the sound with any sort of accuracy to someone who's never heard it, or never known they heard it. I had this discussion with one of the guys from my German classes, and the best thing he could come up with was it's like the u in lute, but not like the oo in loot, as much sense as that makes.
Speaking of the German R, I have a friend who studied abroad in Austria last semester. Everyone he met thought he had a Spanish accent. He couldn't figure out why. It turned out that he was compensating for that nice round American "r" sound by rolling his Rs exactly as they do in Spanish, with the tongue against the hard palatte, instead of making the sound with the softer tissues to the back (which is difficult indeed).
Natuerlich ;-)
Note that the "oo" is an approximation; Slashdot doesn't like IPA characters (as local comments illustrate). I didn't say his name ought to be exactly "grooning," I said something like "grooning." Besides, it seems that it isn't German after all and rhymes with "raining."
Zerstoeren. Koenig. Loewe. Every time I've heard these words, they have the English "oo" sound. Perhaps we have different accents?
Indeed. My accent can't decide where to be from, and I tend to switch back and forth between North German and Viennese frequently, often within the same sentence, depending on which professor or band I learned a word from. The o-umlaut pronunciation is from Rammstein's "Zerstoeren," where the title word is quite clearly pronounced "Tserstooooo-ren."
The "oe," "ae," and "ue" in English are often representations of the German ö, ä, and ü characters. If Matt Groenings name is such a case, it would be pronounced about like "groon-ing."
Hours per player, original EQ might win. Gross hours played, though, WOW has so many more players that even if they were all casual occasional gamers whose internet only worked for five minutes each day while the big dipper was properly aligned, WOW would win hands down.
Strike back at Duke? Have you read anything true about that case?
Evidence? 'Cause I've got mine. Just because something makes sense at first glance (more money == better schools! smaller classes == better performance!) doesn't make it true.
His point is that there's an excess of fibers, and we don't need to recycle paper to keep up paper production. It's not like we're recycling paper to keep from running out.
And when they get more money, does their performance improve?
Please- throwing money at education is not the solution. Poorly-performing inner city public shools receive more money per head than well-performing private schools. Besides, building in additional expense would just increase the cost of the lawsuit. If you're hoping to discourage massive lawsuits in general, this is a bad way to do it. If you're trying to discourage only the frivolous sort, you should realize that while this is slashdot and Microsoft is evilbadsuperdumb, they might well have a legit case.
Your original point stands, though. Historical progress doesn't erase historical mistakes.
How about "Skip bidding?"
The biggest contribution on the list is $9000; most are $2000 or less. If you knew about the public opinion on the RIAA, why would you take money from them? It seems like the negative publicity f having taken money would outweigh whatever you could do with the money.
I'd argue that you yourself, anonymous coward, are also merely a very deeply iterated switch statement, as am I, and everyone around us. Where in your thought process does anything other than brain hardware and past experience enter into the equation?
It is indeed a non-libertarian document, and was illegally drafted in secret. Thomas Jefferson protested it severely. The articles of confederation would have been much, much better.
Missoula, and other college towns, are rather poor examples. State universities do weird things to people's minds.
It seems that "insightful" is still the default "I agree" mod. The argument that Ron Paul is a racist has nothing to do with any actual evidence of racism; he's against federal , and this includes meaningless federal dollars to minorities. Ditto homophobia; the votes in question were against federal funding to encourage homosexual couples to adopt children and against a federal-level "gays can always marry in the US" bill, not against homosexuals. Ron Paul is in favor of the government getting its nose out of marriage completely. Needless knee-jerk reactions and refusals to believe that anyone other than a Democrat (or a Republican) can do anything right? Not terribly insightful in my book.
Yes, but it says later that while they are often treated as synonymous, they are different. Computational means that we're using computers to study , within the classical scientific method: hypothesize, test, observe, refine, grant money, ???, profit (except that we have to use a computer somewhere). Bioinformatics is more about modeling things inside the computer, and doesn't have any real-world parts: your bacteria/proteins/virii exist only as bits. If you use the terms interchangeably nobody will think you're an idiot.