(If you don't believe both of these happen quite often in the private sector, I suggest working for a time in the personnel department of any large firm.)
On the same note, if you believe that a set of tests designed and produced by a private company are at all objective, you may wish to spend some time with the great segment of the American population which has almost 0 representation here on Slashdot-- namely African-Americans, Hispano-Americans, anyone who's Gen 0 or 1 American (i.e. a new immigrant or their child.) If you haven't taken a standardized test (like the SAT, ACT, or my personel bane, the MEAP (a test given to grade, middle and high schoolers in MI), you should maybe order a few sample copies from ETS and give them a look-see.
Look these objectify metersticks of knowledge over and ask yourself: What would this mean to me if I were born after the Cold War? What would this mean to me if I grew up to a single parent in the middle of City X and have never seen an open body of water or a forest? What would this mean to me if English were my second language (N.B., children, that the US has no national language-- we take all comers, here (in theory,) unlike snooty old European nations.)
We'd do better to release this delusion of having aquired objective judges by simply moving people farther away from the process. I'd rather sit in an interview room and know that a white man was seeing me as a black girl, then sit at my little desk and think that some machine somewhere didn't notice or care.
I agree that, in a strict, Oxford English Dictionary-sense of English, correct usage is established by tracking verified, credible uses of a term in print. But, I'm not so sure that the OED's method is necessarily all that accurate. Basically, it means limiting our language to that which the mainstream print-media believes is correct, which has some obvious weaknesses, primarily 1) it cuts out a lot of the once fringe-media which has become our cultural bread-&-butter (e.g. the Web, TV/radio/cable news, etc.) and 2) the print-media is just as fallible as any other conduit-of-culture (e.g. . . . do I even need cite examples?).
"Virii" is a good usage, here, primarily because it has a history in Geek culture. The fact if it being both a pretentious and incorrect usage says something important about the difference between a hacker and a cracker, and speaks volumes of the awkward self-consciousness that is our badge and shackles. The difference between "viruses" and "virii" is thus meaningful-- it encapsulates a subtle cultural/historical lesson about late 20th Century Nerddom.
sorry-- that should be "etymological" not "entymological"-- my bad
Me can say somethun lotsa timez, d00zersmartz, but that's not sufficient to make it "correct".
So what makes a piece of language (or any other quasi-standard, for that matter) correct if not popular support? Maybe English teachers all over the US get together once a year and decide what is and is not correct English, right? I know, I know-- such a symposium is entirely unnecessary: we have the ACs to hand down the absolute, final word on the right way to do things. It's really weird that so many folks who know everything won't sign their name to their divine declarations.
Indeed, the plural of "virus" is "viruses"-- when talking about biological viruses. But "virii" is the acpeted plural of "virus" when reffering to computer viruses (virii?)
Hackers, way back when (probably during the mid-80s), started (erroneously) using the plural "virii" for computer viruses, and it became "correct" through years of use. This is similar to the sitaution with "octopus." Technically, the plural of "octupos" is "octopoda," not "octopi." This owes to the fact that "octopus" isn't Latin, but Greek ("octo" = 8, "pus" = foot.) But, folks have been (erroneously) using "octopi" for so long that it has become correct.
Just a little factoid to help you in Trivial Pursuit.
I've been giving this a lot of thought. Previously I was very pro-AC-- it sounded like a good idea, the op to speak without consequence. And I've seen some great AC posts, very informative, very well-researched and well written. But, those are the vast minority. We should probably collect some actual, hard data on this, but my current estimate is 1 out of every 30 AC posts is worth anything.
The abuse potential is too high, and the rewards too low. It's not as though we'll really lose anything by removing AC-- how many of us are really named "sq4tch" or "dev/nul/" or "Savage Henry Matisse"? There's plenty of safety/anonymity in our "handled" accounts. I feel like a tool saying this, but:
I used to work in an Army Surplus store. One of the managers was a guy named Tony: big guy, 6' 7", shaved head, always talking about the women who were browsing in the store, scoping them out, etc. One day we're sorting posters and I come across a Betty Page pin-up girly thing right in front of a poster celebrating Amelia Earhart.
"Hey, Tone; who'd you rather have sex with: Amelia Earhart or Betty Page?"
"Hank, I tell ya: Betty's got the package, right? Tits, abs, ass-she's built. But flyin' across the Atlantic solo? Man, that shit is hot."
In 2 years, it was by far the most well reasoned, least sexist thing I ever heard him say.
Tone would see the allure of Hedy, no problem. She's Betty's body with Amelia's soul.
When a was just a wee lad, my Mom used to tell me about Hedy Lamarr, how she was the most beautiful women ever and she invented spread-spectrum radio. Ever since, all of my dreams have been of divas and wireless connectivity.
Before you make a purchase at a site, take a look at what kind of server they're running. Here is a nice little CGI that easily lets anyone fetch header info. Among the many bits and pieces in the header is the type of server being used. Although this is by no means fool-proof-- pretty much any system can be set up lazily/ineptly/insecurly, god news-- we all know that some servers (I recognize that this SQL thang isn't exactly a server problem) are more easily accidentally left insecure than others. Additionally, the header info can give you an idea of the OS the folks are running (if you want to be rabid about only supporting Linux based e-tailors, or some such hogwash **grin**.)
In a way, checking on a site's html-headers is the same as glancing at the fry-cook's hands to see if they're dirty-- a guy with clean hands can still sneeze on your burger, but it's still a little peace-of-mind.
Subject line quotes a freind (Jewish guy) of mine who notes that nobody in America bitches like a gentile made to work on a gentile holiday ("gentile holidays" are aka "government/work holidays." For those of you who live in small, homogenous towns, NB that there are quite a lot of folks who give fuck-all about Christams and Easter and every other "official" holiday when the mail doesn't deliver and the SSA doesn't answer their phones.) Jews and Muslims and Buddhists all across this great land put in their hours on Yom Kippur and Ramadan and Tet without a peep (want fun? try explaining Yom Kippur to a fat, glowering, God-faring Christian manager sometime), but ask a gentile to buck up and sit at their terminals during one of their treasured days off and they wheep and moan and carry on like it's the end of the fucking world.
I know that I'm calling on the wall of flame and vitriol by writing this, but please get some perpective: it was Christian New Years (before you ask, yes, the indistrialized world runs on a Christian calendar-- there are previous few truly non-denominational things in this world, friends)-- be thankful for what we do get; we're semi-disposable workers in America, the all-singing, all-dancing crap of history.
These are the same kind of boogieman accusations traditionally leveled against any group that chooses to keep to themselves. Case in point: in Imperial Russia, and later the USSR, Jews were never considered citizens (in fact, under Soviet, rule papers held by Jews carried the nationality of "Jew" rather than the state of birth/residence) because Jews were considered to be more loyal to each other than the state-- and thus, in a way, a nation unto themselves.
These Mason accusations map pretty well to the classic anti-Semitic balderdash: the Masons control the banks, the Masons control the media, the Masons will use clandestine measures to destroy your biz if you cross them, the Masons take care of their own and leave the rest of the world out in the cold. Probably an AC will post soon to note that the Masons have horns, poison reservoirs, eat Christian babies and love nothing more than defiling our non-Mason daughters.
Let's drop the histrionics. The Masons are a bunch of old white farts in funny hats. If someone was posting about how the ZOG (Zionist Occupational Governemnt-- shadow organization that controls the US, popular theory with Christian Patriots and Militia sorts) we wouldn't pay it any mind. So, let's leave those Masons alone.
(or am I a part of the conspiracy, too, out to distract you from the real issues?)
This is all I could come up with in 15 minutes of research (am at work.) All data is courtesy of the Michigan Dept. of Transportation and is posted in PDF format here under the section heading "Traffic Crash Trends." This data is old (1997) but ellucidating.
The MI speed limit went up to 70 mph in 8/96. In that year MI saw 1510 traffic fatalities, 141,007 traffic injuries and owing to 434,135 crashes. Overal fatality rate was 1.7. For '97, MI saw 1446 highway fatalities and 124,777 injuries in 386,795 total crashes (a fairly dramatic drop.) Fatality rate stayed at 1.7. Now, for the sake of comparrison, lets look at '95 (during this enitre year the speed limit was 65 mph): 1537 fatalities, 146,303 injuries in 421,073 crashes-- fatality rate of 1.8.
Is this conclusive? No. Is it interesting? Sure, if you like traffic data, it's pretty fascinating. Daddy loves his MDOT.
FYI, MDOT is trying to move towards a "rational" 85 percentile rule (where the speed limit is set at 85% of that which most drives go when no limit is posted.) I don't know what that would put the limit at, but I certainly like the idea of rational, experimentally derived laws, rules and regulations.
This is an interesting comment-- I'm glad that we've heard from someone who has actually spent some time in the environment in which this tech would be implemented. In the cases you've described, I can definitely see where speed would be a major concern.
(factoid: in the States all roads-- even private drives and tiny little residential strips-- are graded and curves sloped such that, under normal driving conditions, you are safe going even 10 mph over the limit. I guess that, as a society, we've come to terms with how many dim-bulbs we've liscensed, and thus pre-emptively fudge on the side of caution.)
Not to open the flaming floodgates, but the common sense axiom that "but speed kills; of this there is no question" (like many common sense declarations) isn't exactly true. I've spent a lot of time in Michigan, where they saw a marked decrease in fatal auto accidents after uping their speed limit to 70 & 75 on freeways. Although the exact cause/effect relationship at work is still up in the air, some analysts have suggested that at least part of this decrease owes to the fact that people driving faster are more attentive to what they're doing because moving fast helps them stay focused on the fact that hurtling along in an aluminum box is pretty dangerous, in general, regardless of velocity.
Just hoping to help to clarify-- please don't hurt me for dissenting.
link to an AP Wire article
on
Apocalypse Not
·
· Score: 1
I believe the (salient) point that niemidc was trying to make was that the Chinese had already designed and built a printing press that used a modular system of blocks, so that an entirely new stamp did not need to be fabricated for each print job. I don't know that that's true (the Chinese did have a printing press well before the Europeans, although I don't know that they'd managed a modular printing system-- it not being all that integral, given their written langauge's structure), but it seems to have been what the post was getting at.
Also, FYI, I seem to recall Nietzsche remarking in one of his books (probably Beyond Good and Evil) that the things that made the Germans such natural Ubermenschen was that they'd come up with Europe's two greatest inventions: gunpowder and the printing press. I guess that goes to show what an ass Nietszche could make of himself.
I note that in the time between my initially loading the page and my clicking "Reply," a moderator has cruised up and knocked Cpt. Java-Rulez down a point.
Good for you, Moderator. I like your moxie, and am glad that I'm not the only one who thought this comment came in out of nowhere. It would seem that the components most frequently ill-suited to this forum are the Anon Cowards.
And, AC, what flew up your butt? Does Sun cut you a check every week?
I'd disagree on that point-- which is to say that the comedy industry has spawned just such an indistry. Checkout the comedy cavalcades featured on late-night cable (BET has several such shows, as do most interstitial channels.) Most comedians below the level of supa-dupa-star (stars such as old Robin Williams or current Garafalo (sp?)) seem to hover somewhere in the range of "that one guy who swallowed a fetal pig's heart in high school bio class."
I agree that, 9 of 10 times, Kaufman wasn't all that funny. I note that while most Average Joes seem to appraise K. at about this level (i.e. nine-tenths funny) must professional comedians and comedic actors LOVE K. This relationship is analogous to the situation of writers like John Barth: an incredibly influential guys who most Average Joes haven't heard of-- and if they have, they find him almost unbearable. Nonetheless, writers (both aspiring and accomplished) always have an opinion on Barth, and most of them think he's a genius.
What it boils down to is this: much as Barth writes meta-fiction (that is, fiction that is not just about the story's characters, but also about itself as a work of fiction, an artifical experience written on a page) Kaufman (sp?) was a meta-comedian. His act wasn't just about being funny, but examining how things are funny and how we find them to be funny. In this sense, yes, the man was certainly an artists. But, that by no means is to say that he was especially aesthetically appealing or all that much of a blast.
Again, just the opinion of one guy who isn't a comedian.
ProxiNet hosts at least one such server (I use it right now; you sign up for a free account-- which of course means that they know all of your palm viewing habits) which allows you to use ProxiWeb right away. (Caveat: provided that I'm understanding it right...) it seems that they're offering ProxiWare in an attempt to branch out, so that other folks will be able to affer similar services.
To the best of my understanding (and this involves some guessing) ProxiNet "digests" web pages to be viewed on Palms via the ProxiWeb browser (hence the "proxy.") I'm fairly sure that ProxiWare is the prog which handles that digesting.
(N.B. I'm trying to up the signal-to-moise ratio, here-- lotta first-posters at 7:48 pm, 12/29) I use a Palm IIIx and wired PalmModem and have zero problems with crashes, lockups and other reset-situations when browsing or mailing. I use ProxiWeb 3.5 (great service/software combo, and free), AvantGo, the native Mail program coupled with TopGun Postman and Palm Telnet and they always run smooth as silk.
Unfortunately, you can bust someone for "pointing at the doorway." I'm no lawyer, but that's what charges of conspiracy, accesory before- and/or after-the-fact and contribution (e.g. contributing to the delinquency of a minor) are for. And then there are always "samaritan laws" (laws which make it a crime not to try and prevent a crime or accident or to neglect to come to the aid of someone in need.)
image: Trinity-looking model in skin-tight vinyl jumpsuit.
caption:"Hands Free Poultry Inspection System: Food inspection workers need to make written reports without tying up their hands. Designed at the Georgia Tech Research Institute, this voice activated computer can allow poultry workers to create reports completely hands free. "
Slashdot Mirror
On the same note, if you believe that a set of tests designed and produced by a private company are at all objective, you may wish to spend some time with the great segment of the American population which has almost 0 representation here on Slashdot-- namely African-Americans, Hispano-Americans, anyone who's Gen 0 or 1 American (i.e. a new immigrant or their child.) If you haven't taken a standardized test (like the SAT, ACT, or my personel bane, the MEAP (a test given to grade, middle and high schoolers in MI), you should maybe order a few sample copies from ETS and give them a look-see.
Look these objectify metersticks of knowledge over and ask yourself: What would this mean to me if I were born after the Cold War? What would this mean to me if I grew up to a single parent in the middle of City X and have never seen an open body of water or a forest? What would this mean to me if English were my second language (N.B., children, that the US has no national language-- we take all comers, here (in theory,) unlike snooty old European nations.)
We'd do better to release this delusion of having aquired objective judges by simply moving people farther away from the process. I'd rather sit in an interview room and know that a white man was seeing me as a black girl, then sit at my little desk and think that some machine somewhere didn't notice or care.
"Virii" is a good usage, here, primarily because it has a history in Geek culture. The fact if it being both a pretentious and incorrect usage says something important about the difference between a hacker and a cracker, and speaks volumes of the awkward self-consciousness that is our badge and shackles. The difference between "viruses" and "virii" is thus meaningful-- it encapsulates a subtle cultural/historical lesson about late 20th Century Nerddom.
Me can say somethun lotsa timez, d00zersmartz, but that's not sufficient to make it "correct".
So what makes a piece of language (or any other quasi-standard, for that matter) correct if not popular support? Maybe English teachers all over the US get together once a year and decide what is and is not correct English, right? I know, I know-- such a symposium is entirely unnecessary: we have the ACs to hand down the absolute, final word on the right way to do things. It's really weird that so many folks who know everything won't sign their name to their divine declarations.
Hackers, way back when (probably during the mid-80s), started (erroneously) using the plural "virii" for computer viruses, and it became "correct" through years of use. This is similar to the sitaution with "octopus." Technically, the plural of "octupos" is "octopoda," not "octopi." This owes to the fact that "octopus" isn't Latin, but Greek ("octo" = 8, "pus" = foot.) But, folks have been (erroneously) using "octopi" for so long that it has become correct.
Just a little factoid to help you in Trivial Pursuit.
I'm all for the ellimination of the AC account.
I've been giving this a lot of thought. Previously I was very pro-AC-- it sounded like a good idea, the op to speak without consequence. And I've seen some great AC posts, very informative, very well-researched and well written. But, those are the vast minority. We should probably collect some actual, hard data on this, but my current estimate is 1 out of every 30 AC posts is worth anything.
The abuse potential is too high, and the rewards too low. It's not as though we'll really lose anything by removing AC-- how many of us are really named "sq4tch" or "dev/nul/" or "Savage Henry Matisse"? There's plenty of safety/anonymity in our "handled" accounts. I feel like a tool saying this, but:
no more AC, please.
("S"HM exits, stage left, head hung in shame.)
"Hey, Tone; who'd you rather have sex with: Amelia Earhart or Betty Page?"
"Hank, I tell ya: Betty's got the package, right? Tits, abs, ass-she's built. But flyin' across the Atlantic solo? Man, that shit is hot."
In 2 years, it was by far the most well reasoned, least sexist thing I ever heard him say.
Tone would see the allure of Hedy, no problem. She's Betty's body with Amelia's soul.
God bless you, Hedy. You're missed
In a way, checking on a site's html-headers is the same as glancing at the fry-cook's hands to see if they're dirty-- a guy with clean hands can still sneeze on your burger, but it's still a little peace-of-mind.
that's classic, it's art-- swear to God, holmes: you're my hero...
I know that I'm calling on the wall of flame and vitriol by writing this, but please get some perpective: it was Christian New Years (before you ask, yes, the indistrialized world runs on a Christian calendar-- there are previous few truly non-denominational things in this world, friends)-- be thankful for what we do get; we're semi-disposable workers in America, the all-singing, all-dancing crap of history.
(Good Christ, I'm ranting. Please pardon.)
i am not a unique snowflake.
These Mason accusations map pretty well to the classic anti-Semitic balderdash: the Masons control the banks, the Masons control the media, the Masons will use clandestine measures to destroy your biz if you cross them, the Masons take care of their own and leave the rest of the world out in the cold. Probably an AC will post soon to note that the Masons have horns, poison reservoirs, eat Christian babies and love nothing more than defiling our non-Mason daughters.
Let's drop the histrionics. The Masons are a bunch of old white farts in funny hats. If someone was posting about how the ZOG (Zionist Occupational Governemnt-- shadow organization that controls the US, popular theory with Christian Patriots and Militia sorts) we wouldn't pay it any mind. So, let's leave those Masons alone.
(or am I a part of the conspiracy, too, out to distract you from the real issues?)
The MI speed limit went up to 70 mph in 8/96. In that year MI saw 1510 traffic fatalities, 141,007 traffic injuries and owing to 434,135 crashes. Overal fatality rate was 1.7. For '97, MI saw 1446 highway fatalities and 124,777 injuries in 386,795 total crashes (a fairly dramatic drop.) Fatality rate stayed at 1.7. Now, for the sake of comparrison, lets look at '95 (during this enitre year the speed limit was 65 mph): 1537 fatalities, 146,303 injuries in 421,073 crashes-- fatality rate of 1.8.
Is this conclusive? No. Is it interesting? Sure, if you like traffic data, it's pretty fascinating. Daddy loves his MDOT.
FYI, MDOT is trying to move towards a "rational" 85 percentile rule (where the speed limit is set at 85% of that which most drives go when no limit is posted.) I don't know what that would put the limit at, but I certainly like the idea of rational, experimentally derived laws, rules and regulations.
(factoid: in the States all roads-- even private drives and tiny little residential strips-- are graded and curves sloped such that, under normal driving conditions, you are safe going even 10 mph over the limit. I guess that, as a society, we've come to terms with how many dim-bulbs we've liscensed, and thus pre-emptively fudge on the side of caution.)
Just hoping to help to clarify-- please don't hurt me for dissenting.
Y2K Briefs
Also, FYI, I seem to recall Nietzsche remarking in one of his books (probably Beyond Good and Evil) that the things that made the Germans such natural Ubermenschen was that they'd come up with Europe's two greatest inventions: gunpowder and the printing press. I guess that goes to show what an ass Nietszche could make of himself.
Good for you, Moderator. I like your moxie, and am glad that I'm not the only one who thought this comment came in out of nowhere. It would seem that the components most frequently ill-suited to this forum are the Anon Cowards.
And, AC, what flew up your butt? Does Sun cut you a check every week?
Pissily,
I'd disagree on that point-- which is to say that the comedy industry has spawned just such an indistry. Checkout the comedy cavalcades featured on late-night cable (BET has several such shows, as do most interstitial channels.) Most comedians below the level of supa-dupa-star (stars such as old Robin Williams or current Garafalo (sp?)) seem to hover somewhere in the range of "that one guy who swallowed a fetal pig's heart in high school bio class."
What it boils down to is this: much as Barth writes meta-fiction (that is, fiction that is not just about the story's characters, but also about itself as a work of fiction, an artifical experience written on a page) Kaufman (sp?) was a meta-comedian. His act wasn't just about being funny, but examining how things are funny and how we find them to be funny. In this sense, yes, the man was certainly an artists. But, that by no means is to say that he was especially aesthetically appealing or all that much of a blast.
Again, just the opinion of one guy who isn't a comedian.
Why? I haven't the foggiest
Any better/more informed guesses?
AvantGo
ProxiNet
TopGun (as well as some other nifty Palm progs)
Palm Telnet 0.41
Just some FYI, I guess.
Crazy stuff, kids.
caption:"Hands Free Poultry Inspection System: Food inspection workers need to make written reports without tying up their hands. Designed at the Georgia Tech Research Institute, this voice activated computer can allow poultry workers to create reports completely hands free. "
direct link