topbanner_forum
  *

avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Thursday November 20, 2025, 5:14 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Recent Posts

Pages: prev1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 ... 438next
1401
Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 08:12 PM »
A surprising programme from BBC Radio 4: Everything We Know Is Wrong (click on link to download/hear the programme)
Written notes:
Every day the newspapers carry stories of new scientific findings. There are 15 million scientists worldwide all trying to get their research published. But a disturbing fact appears if you look closely: as time goes by, many scientific findings seem to become less true than we thought. It's called the "decline effect" - and some findings even dwindle away to zero.

A highly influential paper by Dr John Ioannidis at Stanford University called "Why most published research findings are false" argues that fewer than half of scientific papers can be believed, and that the hotter a scientific field (with more scientific teams involved), the less likely the research findings are to be true. He even showed that of the 49 most highly cited medical papers, only 34 had been retested and of them 41 per cent had been convincingly shown to be wrong. And yet they were still being cited.

Again and again, researchers are finding the same things, whether it's with observational studies, or even the "gold standard" Randomised Controlled Studies, whether it's medicine or economics. Nobody bothers to try to replicate most studies, and when they do try, the majority of findings don't stack up. The awkward truth is that, taken as a whole, the scientific literature is full of falsehoods.

Jolyon Jenkins reports on the factors that lie behind this. How researchers who are obliged for career reasons to produce studies that have "impact"; of small teams who produce headline-grabbing studies that are too statistically underpowered to produce meaningful results; of the way that scientists are under pressure to spin their findings and pretend that things they discovered by chance are what they were looking for in the first place. It's not exactly fraud, but it's not completely honest either. And he reports on new initiatives to go through the literature systematically trying to reproduce published findings, and of the bitter and personalised battles that can occur as a result.

Producer/Presenter: Jolyon Jenkins.



Interesting. I suppose that it sort of explains why medical advice changes every few years. Yesterday X was great, and today X is bad.
1402
Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 08:09 PM »
Yes, I read about this and remain skeptical in the absence of solid proof, either way.

The issue is mired down with too much baggage. The best one can hope for is just a gamble.
1403
Living Room / Re: Homebrewing
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 11:58 AM »
The last batch of beer is working very well, and the batch of ginger ale is highly alcoholic. But, I'm too lit to continue typing. :P

1404
Living Room / Re: Does anyone here use Bitcoins?
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 10:55 AM »
Seems like Bitcoin (and other) mining is artificially crippled so the miner devs make higher profits:
http://da-data.blogs...-monero-and-cpu.html

Too much to drink, so that's too much to read...

My gut reaction is that it's just another alt being mined to convert into BTC. Most are.

Am I off? Got a tl;dr?

1405
Living Room / Re: Mystery of Death Valley's Sliding Rocks Solved
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 10:52 AM »
I can never tell whether Renegade is being satirical or serious...

Renegade...you need to get a writing job for The Onion...seriously...if that is Satire, it is very well written in the sense that it looks like the author believes what they are writing...

If not...Then...I don't even know any more  :huh:

lol

Hahaha! 8)

That was all just pure silliness. 40hz beat me to the punch on the alien angle, but I still had to get it in there! :)

However, I did actually mix in some truth there. (Not kidding and not disputable - pure fact.) I'll leave it for people to figure out what the actual true part was! :P

1406
Living Room / Re: The Movie and Book Writing Thread
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 10:48 AM »
Let's put this through the "Ren Test"  ;D

Here is a short section from a book I am writing, which I would love to get some opinions on :)

Here are some free-form comments inline. I'm only addressing grammar and style. I'm going to avoid any artistic decisions for the sake of focus.

(When I say "style", I mean the style of grammar used.)

I'm marking my comments with "R - ".



Really, there is no way he could have seen this coming.  Spending every day locked away in his own little world; friends all around, but loneliness so vivid. 

R - Your use of semi-colons is jarring. Semi-colons join related sentences, but don't replace commas.


Darkness was his companion, the light; his enemy. 

R - Same issue. Consider using commas.

R - If you're looking to jar the reader with some kind of shock, then, well, I'm not so sure that it works as it also introduces a bit of confusion. Perhaps an ellipsis there would work better. e.g.

Darkness was his companion, the light... his enemy. 



Yet, somehow, through the mist, he saw something that made no sense, something he couldn't explain.  Words cannot describe

R - Consider using:

Words could not describe...

R - That sticks to the same tense.

the feeling that had come over him, and all he knew, was that something was changing...something strange,

R - Ellipses styles vary. I'm not fond of the lack of a space following an ellipsis, but others prefer it when the first letter is lower-case.


something wonderful, but also absolutely terrifying.  It took only a few moments for things to become clear, and he could see through the mist, he could feel the breeze. 

R - That's where a semi-colon is needed. Right now you have a comma splice. Consider the following:


It took only a few moments for things to become clear, and he could see through the mist; he could feel the breeze. 

R - Or, this:

It took only a few moments for things to become clear, and he could see through the mist, feel the breeze. 

R - Now, that's not a strict grammatical style, but it fits. Here's a stricter style:

It took only a few moments for things to become clear as he could see through the mist and feel the breeze. 

R - There are many ways to work that out. Styles differ, but sticking to more common styles that don't violate basic grammar rules is the best way to go unless there is a very compelling reason.


Something whispered out to him, and he knew then, what he must do, to survive.

R - Now, for the specific style that I prefer, I'd use ellipses there instead of commas. They simply work better in many cases as they indicate to the reader that the reader needs to imagine something or fill in the blanks. Here's an example with ellipses:


Something whispered out to him, and he knew then... what he had to do... to survive.


R - I also swapped out "must" there as it doesn't work well in the past tense. "Had to" or "needed to" are better choices as they inflect for the past tense. But, I think this would still be better:


Something whispered out to him, and he knew then what he had to do... to survive.


R - You might get flak from some people for the comma there, but there's nothing wrong with it at all. Commas are also used to indicate pauses, and that works there. ;)


(New Chapter)

Things just didn't seem quite right, what with everything that was happening. 


R - You are adopting a very conversational tone there with how you're phrasing things. Nothing wrong with that. Just an observation. (The "what" triggers that.)

Days seemed short, the nights long, no matter what he said, there was nothing getting through, nothing had the power to break through the wall, and that left him with a heart so powerless, his soul fading like sheets blowing into the distance. 


R - There again I'd say go back and examine how you're using commas. You've got comma splices in there with no apparently good reason for them.


Days seemed short. Nights long.

R - That punctuates it a bit better. The next part is a bit hairy.

No matter what he said, there was nothing getting through, nothing had the power to break through the wall, and that left him with a heart so powerless, his soul fading like sheets blowing into the distance. 


R - Now, in that part the second comma would be better as a period. Check this:

No matter what he said, there was nothing getting through. Nothing had the power to break through the wall, and that left him with a heart so powerless, his soul fading like sheets blowing into the distance. 


R - The second sentence there could use some tightening up:


Nothing had the power to break through the wall, and that left him with a heart so powerless, his soul faded like sheets blowing into the distance. 


R - Faded vs. fading. "Fading" simply doesn't work as you're then changing the tense which is jarring, grammatically wrong, and simply not working well there.



R - Everything here works fine. No issues at all.

Hidden away, lost, and with an overwhelming loneliness thrust through his soul, he had no clue how to overcome the feelings of darkness that passed through him on a minute-by-minute basis.  Nothing seemed to help.  Life was slipping past him at an incredible rate, yet the world seemed to stay without motion, words resonating without echo, quickly evaporating into a hazy mist.




People move so quickly these days, but for reasons that are unknown,

R - Here you can cut out some clutter. Consider this:

People move so quickly these days, but for reasons unknown,

R - Eliminating "that are" makes that flow better. Also, tense.

R - Continuing:

People move so quickly these days, but for reasons unknown, his feet are stuck in the quicksand he has created,


R - You're drifting through tenses without any kind of purpose there. -- "are stuck"

R - Now, you **can** shift through tenses, but you really need to work hard on making that tense shift obvious **AND** acceptable to the reader.

R - Also, consider your use of past participles: "he has created".

R - British English is far less direct than American English. The simple past works much better for effect as it is more definite.

R - Going over that part so far...

People move so quickly these days, but for reasons unknown, his feet stuck in the quicksand he created, lost in his own spirit, drowning in solitude, and with painful angst, he muttered slowly with every breath he could muster, hoping for some release, something to help him climb up from the bottom of this endless cliff, but that was a path he could not see. 


R - I tighted up the tense there. Now we can see that this is a recent story with better clairity.

R - For "this endless cliff", I'm not fond of that. Consider this:

something to help him climb up from the bottom of his endless cliff,

R - Also, instead of "but that was a path he could not see", consider:

but that was a path he was blind to.

R - Above I quibbled about comma use, but in that passage there I think you've nailed some good usage and it works.


R - Here, I have to wonder if you're guilty of a typo or trolling me:

It is amazing to think, that for a long time, these feelings where locked, like an ocean liner trapped in a bottle or a firefly lost in the sunset.

R - This instead:

It is amazing to think, that for a long time, these feelings were locked, like an ocean liner trapped in a bottle or a firefly lost in the sunset.

R - ;)


His mind twisted like branches around an old oak tree,

R - The word you're looking for is "ivy". Just a simple word choice there:

His mind twisted like ivy around an old oak tree,

R - Here:

His mind twisted like ivy around an old oak tree, trying to find resolve, desperate for an end, a way through, some meaning, some light, but nothing would go right, every turn was littered with voids. 


R - You've got the effect going quite well, then you ruin it here:

some light, but nothing would go right

R - That comma doesn't work very well. It's "ok" (in a horrible sense), but you've shown that you can do much better. Consider a period or rewriting that section.

R - Here:

but nothing would go right, every turn was littered with voids.

R - The comma doesn't work well.


R - Here:


He spent his days locked behind a glaring screen, sound coming through was muffled and empty, but it gave him a reason, a way forward, and a path on which to travel where he couldn't feel.  Every word he tried to say, came out backwards, and it was breaking him.


R - "glaring screen, sound" -- Comma use again. It could work, but you need to rewrite that passage to make it flow better. Here's a quick "out of my butt" example:

R - From:

He spent his days locked behind a glaring screen, sound coming through was muffled and empty,

R - To:

He spent his days locked behind a glaring screen with sound coming through muffled and empty,

R - For this:

where he couldn't feel

R - I think I'd like this better:

where he could be numb

R - A positive assertion often works better than a negative one.

R - Here:

Every word he tried to say, came out backwards, and it was breaking him.

R - The first comma doesn't seem to have any purpose. Try this:

Every word he tried to say came out backwards, and it was breaking him.

R - I'm skipping the last 2 paragraphs there. Except for this:

Sitting there, he could think clearly, so clearly.

R - When using "so", make sure that what should follow is clear. The general construct is "so X that Y", and the "Y" needs to be clear unless there's a good reason, e.g. You purposefully want to leave that question unanswered so that the reader can discover it through some sort of revelation later on. You use "so" in a few places. Double-check that you have used it properly.

R - From what I can see there, you're using commas as a crutch, and it's not working well. This is the biggest problem I see there.

R - For tense, you really need to pay more attention to get your tenses agreeing better. Right now you're switching between tenses with no focus. From what I can see, you're trying to get the "immediacy" of the present tenses, but how you transition is simply unacceptable. Now, that's not to say that it can't be done. However, those transitions need to be planned and orchestrated very carefully. I can't give you an example because, let's face it... that shit is hard and takes time.

R - As it stands, you have some work to do to get that up to publishable standards. A lot of that work is almost trivial to fix. A couple hours of reading on grammar and you're good to go.

R - In any event, that's just a very (not "so" ;) ) quick technical analysis of some grammar and style.

R - I focused on a lot of negative things there, but that's basically what I do -- corrections.

R - Today I did some work for a medical instrument company, and had to come back to them with some much worse news than I've given you. Sigh... I hate being the "bad guy" sometimes.

R - Anyways, my home brew is f**king awesome! :D I'm not going to be able to type much of anything soon. ;) :P



1407
Living Room / Re: My Stinking, Rotten ASUS Router Died Overnight!
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 05:33 AM »
No internet

C'mon J-mac! You should know better and label threads with such horrible language as NSFL! ;D

But yeah... been there... It's a very unhappy camper situation.

1408
Living Room / Re: Youtube stepping up video size again?
« Last post by Renegade on August 29, 2014, 12:35 AM »
Screen real estate.

It's now showing up at a 720p size. It was 360p, then 480p, and now 720p.
1409
Living Room / Youtube stepping up video size again?
« Last post by Renegade on August 28, 2014, 11:28 PM »
Has anyone noticed that Youtube has stepped up the size of the videos again?

Now everything seems simply massive.
1410
A site that tracks "hitler" on reddit:

http://hitler.sexy/



TotalHitlers: 330157    Days until MegaHitler: 295    ATHR (AllTimeHitlerRate): 1.58 hpm (hitlers per minute)
  TotalKochs: 16081   TopKochs: jpurdy(127) PoliticBot(73) Handy_Related_Sub(70) GoddessWins(69) fantasyfest(62)
  HitlerLoad: 0.02, 0.03, 0.02 (hitlerun-q: 1, 5, and 15 minutes)
   HitlerPct: 0.164316% of all comments are literally a hitler

TIMESTAMP           SUBREDDIT                TYPE     USER                     THREAD
2014-08-29 00:04:46 Warthunder               hitler   Taven                    www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/2ew1a3
2014-08-29 00:03:46 explainlikeimfive        hitler   therealterrorist         www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2euolx
2014-08-29 00:02:58 UkrainianConflict        nazi     Arctorkovich             www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianConflict/comments/2evr87
2014-08-29 00:02:58 todayilearned            hitler   nutless_monkey           www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/2et9k8
2014-08-29 00:01:54 explainlikeimfive        nazi     saskatchewanian          www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/2evtqd
2014-08-29 00:01:40 worldnews                nazi     PHalfpipe                www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/2euhg6
2014-08-29 00:01:24 worldnews                hitler   MaybeUnusedUsername      www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/2eurwo
2014-08-29 00:00:51 Austin                   nazi     Unwanted_Commentary      www.reddit.com/r/Austin/comments/2etgny


1411
Living Room / Re: Mystery of Death Valley's Sliding Rocks Solved
« Last post by Renegade on August 28, 2014, 10:48 PM »
That principle could well be in action with these "moving rocks" also.
Empiric method. Innit great?

You betcha! Saves endless speculation and "explanations" of how it had to be aliens and UFO technology that made it possible.

This rube has made a career of it:
 (see attachment in previous post)

Huh? But it was. The article is just yet another colossal government cover-up to hide secret Pleiadian anti-gravity technologies that they got from a downed UFO in New Mexico in 1957. (They've been unable to locate the downed spacecraft in the desert in the article - that's the real culprit here! It probably crashed hundreds of years ago and is still pumping out anti-grav fields from it's worm-tractor propulsion drives.)

But that's not the real story - they got a damaged zero-point energy device there as well, but weren't able to fully reverse engineer it until 1983 when they did a secret technology trade with the Russians, who had previously recovered a partially functional ZPE device in Siberia. This all started at the weaponized warfare treaty conference - the one signed in 1977 - but took 6 years to conclude as an additional "weaponized alien technology treaty" (mostly about directed energy weapons) was also needed, and while Jimmy Carter was more amicable, Ronald Reagan demanded harsher conditions, which caused some friction with the Russians, delaying the signing.

And that's just one tiny fragment of the beginning!!!

So you see, it really all was about aliens!  :Thmbsup:

For realz!
1412
Living Room / Re: Movies or films you've seen lately
« Last post by Renegade on August 28, 2014, 10:31 PM »
I've seen some of the shows mentions. Here are my 2 satoshis. ;)

Dominion: Blah. Trying to watch... but it keeps losing my interest. "Supernatural" does a much better job with the 'supernatural'.

Defiance: Very good show. It peters out at times, but picks up quickly.

The Last Ship: Much better than I thought it would be. Still a bit jingoistic, but, a decent story.

The Strain: This is a good show. It keeps getting deeper & deeper. Once it hits season 2, it will likely be far better than any of the others I've mentioned here. But, it's still in that "season 1 finding its pace" phase.

Falling Skies: It has its moments, and will go through several episodes of "blah" before it picks up again. But, when it picks up, it does extremely well.



If you keep track of movies and TV shows, you'll likely have noticed that they very often come out in pairs where the same basic themes are played out with the same archetypes, but the specifics are changed for different audiences. e.g. The Last Ship & The Strain. Here's how that plays out:

Theme: The godvernment saviour

The Last Ship - Navy
The Strain - CDC

Theme: Medical emergencies!!!

The Last Ship - A lethal virus plague
The Strain - A vampire infectious plague

Archetype: The torn hero who battles against all the same crap as every other infuriatingly trite "hero" character with all the accompanying baggage and idiocy you've come to expect

The Last Ship - CO CDR Tom Chandler
The Strain - Ephraim Goodweather

Archetype: The good guy who has done something really bad & is in need of redemption

The Last Ship - Quincy
The Strain - Jim Kent

etc. etc. etc.

The exact same thing plays out in countless shows and movies that are always released in pairs within a few months of each other, though occasionally you do see these pairs released in successive seasons.

1413
Living Room / Re: The Movie and Book Writing Thread
« Last post by Renegade on August 28, 2014, 09:31 PM »
If you look into the issue, you will find little agreement on it from those that adhere to prescriptive grammatical rules (as opposed to normative). For prescriptive grammar, the debate is about whether or not collectives are to be treated as plurals or not, and whether or not number penetrates through qualified singular nouns.

Here's the problem I see with your entire line of reasoning. The rules aren't for writers. They're for people who aren't writers, but need to write nonetheless. Writing is like music. It's something you need to feel to do it well. In fact what I usually tell people is the rules are for people who can't hear the music.

I think that you've mistook what I was saying there. I wasn't trying to dictate rules for writers. You're right there - writers know the rules well enough that they can become creative with them for effect. Or perhaps in other words, mastering the rules frees you of them.

But you simply don't find good writers using bad or sloppy grammar like you would find in the comments sections of major news sites, Youtube, or Facebook.

Carrying on with the music metaphor, take the intro to Purple Haze and the dissonance in it. Dissonance is generally to be avoided, but Jimi simply makes it work. Masters get to break the rules, and we know that it was someone who has actually mastered the rules by how the end results are.

Incidentally, this would be an interesting question for AI.
1414
Sue! Mouser vs Mouser.

I'm not sure whether that's a win-win or a lose-lose proposition...  :huh:
1415
...And then just for a giggle, I turn on the news this morning to find out that said banking institution just got hacked ... Wow, who'd a thunk that would happen.. :-\

Oh gawd... Y'know, pretty much every time I hear about a bank getting hacked, the first thing that goes through my head is, "Serves you morons right. I hope it hurts."

"Passwords are limited to 1 digit." <-- Beta testing... We'll fix it later. :P
1416
CISPA is now CISA.

http://www.cispaisback.org

Oh, gee. Such surprise! Very unexpected. Wow.  :-\
1417
I ran into a banking institution yesterday that did not allow special characters or spaces, but did required a number be included in the user name.

Like the outcome of that isn't going to be predictable as hell ...(y0ur N4m3)... Derp!

If a username/password is actually printed on paper, then it makes sense to not include beginning or ending spaces. But with the incredible invention of monospaced fonts, there's no reason why "a     b" couldn't be a valid username or password. I have never understood why "spaces" aren't allowed.

I do wish that sites would say what is allowed as a regular expression. That would make everything so much easier and clearer. For me. And other regex freaks. :P
1418
Living Room / Re: Peer Review and the Scientific Process
« Last post by Renegade on August 27, 2014, 11:02 PM »
If the below turns out to be correct, it's going to be pretty damning against the CDC and "peer review" as we have it now.

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1164794

Fraud at the CDC uncovered, 340% increased risk of autism hidden from public

More...
http://www.naturalne...C_whistleblower.html

Vaccine bombshell: CDC whistleblower reveals cover-up linking MMR vaccines to autism in African-Americans



http://www.naturalne...C_whistleblower.html

A medical conspiracy of epic proportions stands to bring down the entire vaccine house of cards following the revelation that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) censored key data linking the MMR vaccine to autism. A top CDC researcher-turned-whistleblower has come forward with the truth about a study that the CDC has long claimed proves the safety of MMR, when in fact it actually shows the exact opposite.

http://www.canarypar...t-news&Itemid=50

Rob Schneider Demands Answers on CDC MMR Fraud   

In light of the revelation that Dr. William Thompson, senior scientiest at CDC, has admitted guilt in hiding data that found that black males are 340% more likely to have an autism diagnosis when given the MMR before age 3, Rob Schneider has written to the office of the Governor of California, Jerry Brown, to assure himself that Brown is aware of the fraud, and to demand answers and actions to protect California children.

http://www.rawstory....changed-autism-data/

Actor and anti-vaxxer Rob Schneider: I have proof the CDC ‘fraudulently changed’ autism data

Actor and anti-vaccine advocate Rob Schneider contacted California Gov. Jerry Brown’s office (D) claiming to possess documents showing that the Centers for Disease Control has hidden data showing Black children are at a particularly high risk of developing autism from vaccines.

According to the anti-vaccine site The Canary Party, Schneider stated in his letter to deputy legislative secretary Lark Park that he was “compelled” to share his proof of a CDC report the agency suppressed and “fraudulently changed.”

“One disturbing disclosure, AFRICAN AMERICAN CHILDREN were and still are THREE HUNDRED AND FIFTY PERCENT more likely to develop Autism under the current Vaccine MMR schedule,” Schneider wrote. “This according to the original CDC study in 2001.”


On the flip side, here's the "debunk":

http://www.scienceba...rican-american-boys/

Here we go again.

Regular readers who pay attention to the antivaccine movement almost can’t help but have noticed that last week there was a lot of activity on antivaccine websites, blogs, and Facebook pages, as well as Twitter and Instagram feeds. For all I know, it’s all out there on Pinterest (which I’ve never really understood), Tumblr, and all those other social media sites that I don’t check much, if at all. In particular, it’s been exploding under the Twitter hashtags #CDCwhistleblower, #CDCfraud, and #CDCPantsOnFire. It’s almost impossible to have missed it if you’re plugged in and pay attention to crank websites, as many skeptics do, but here are a selection of the main stories going around over the last few days:

And:

http://scienceblogs....rsy-continues-apace/

Here it is, Tuesday already, and the antivaccine underground is still on full mental jacket alert over the biggest story the antivaccine movement has seen in a while. Fortunately, it’s a story that’s been largely ignored by the mainstream media, which tells me that maybe, just maybe, the mainstream media has figured out that it shouldn’t give undue credence to cranks. I’m referring, of course, to the claim that the CDC has for 13 years been covering up smoking gun evidence that the MMR vaccine when administered before 36 months causes autism in African-American males.

It's a developing story, so I suppose there's not much to do but wait until more analysis comes out.

If it does turn out that there was fraud, then we have some pretty nasty stuff to deal with.

I've not looked too deeply into it, so I have no idea about what is or isn't correct there. It could all just be complete nonsense, but, considering (source):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.....gov/pubmed/21623535
http://www.ncbi.nlm.....gov/pubmed/24354891
http://www.ncbi.nlm.....gov/pubmed/12145534
http://www.ncbi.nlm.....gov/pubmed/21058170
http://www.ncbi.nlm.....gov/pubmed/15527868

It may not be.

It's not like medical cover-ups haven't happened before.

1419
Living Room / Re: The Movie and Book Writing Thread
« Last post by Renegade on August 27, 2014, 09:23 PM »

That's just one of my pet peeves.


@R - Out of curiosity....just how many of this pets do you have? It must be hundreds.  :P ;D ;)

I see what you did their.

All right now, you guys is just being mean.

Hahaha! Those are all pretty good.

Now... time to drop the gears into grammar Nazi mode! ;)

@R - Out of curiosity....just how many of this pets do you have? It must be hundreds.  :P ;D ;)

"It" in that case refers to "pets", so there is no number agreement there.

However, there is a case to be made for "It must be hundreds."

"Take the expression '10<5' for example. This is false because 10 is greater than 5."

The grammar there is fine. '10' is taken to be 'a number', which is singular. This happens quite often in English, and in other contexts as well.

All right now, you guys is just being mean.

This case is excluded from that class though as there is no ambiguity about number with 'guys'. (I'll get back to this below.)

However, there is a class of subjects where number can be assigned more or less freely as the speaker wishes. For example:

"Intel is/are introducing a new class of processor next week."

DC'ers from North America are more likely to choose "is", while those in the UK are more likely to choose "are".

The question is about whether "Intel" is an organisation that requires singular verb agreement for number, or is a collective that requires a plural form.

If you look into the issue, you will find little agreement on it from those that adhere to prescriptive grammatical rules (as opposed to normative). For prescriptive grammar, the debate is about whether or not collectives are to be treated as plurals or not, and whether or not number penetrates through qualified singular nouns. For example,

The class of students is waiting. vs. The class of students are waiting.

Compare that to:

The class is waiting.

You would never say:

The class are waiting.

Because you reserve the use of "are" there for:

The classes are waiting.

The ambiguity arises when "class" is qualified as a collective by "of students".

You can ask that question like so:

Which is the correct underlining for the subject in the following sentence (<to be> is left in the infinitive):

1. The class of students <to be> waiting.
2. The class of students <to be> waiting.

In #2, <to be> is clearly "is". In #1, there is a degree of ambiguity that leaves the speaker to decide on whether or not the subject should be treated as singular or a collective, and whether or not to treat collectives as plural, as is done in British English very often.

Getting back to the "guys" example, there is no ambiguity for number there. This is similar to the case:

"There are <plural>."

The dummy pronoun "there" (and others) takes its number from the object, which is understood to be the actual subject of the sentence. 

"Guys" is definite, while "there" is a dummy pronoun that can be either singular or plural. In both cases they have the same position as the subject of the sentence. However, "guys" is the subject proper, while for dummy pronouns, they are not the subject proper, but rather refer to it in the object position.

Another ambiguity arises for dummy pronouns when a plural object is a list of singular objects, e.g. "a cat, a dog, and a mouse". For example:

There is/are a cat, a dog, and a mouse in the house.

In this version:

There are a cat, a dog, and a mouse in the house.

The actual subject is clearly "a cat, a dog, and a mouse." (NOTE: The previous sentence sets up another case for number. I'm skipping it.)

However, in this version:

There is a cat, a dog, and a mouse in the house.

It makes sense to understand that as a shortened version of:

There is a cat (in the house), and there is a dog (in the house), and there is a mouse in the house.

That may seem counterintuitive for some, but consider the following case for number agreement:

There are 2 beers.

"Beers" is simply nonsensical. There is no such things as "beers"... until you understand that what is meant is:

There are 2 bottles of beer.

We truncate "bottles of beer" to "beers". (The same goes for 'glasses', etc., but not for 'cases' or 'kegs' or 'pitchers'.)

"Beer" itself is a liquid, which is non-countable. Bottles, on the other hand, are countable.

(I'm going to skip the case for "waters" as that issue diverges into other cases not related to number agreement.)



Blah... Time to get on to some work. :P





1420
Living Room / Re: Interesting response to a request for "work for free"
« Last post by Renegade on August 27, 2014, 08:27 PM »
Nice! That was really good to hear.

I tripped across this from following links:

NSFW - http://vimeo.com/22053820

But, yeah. Exactly. That.

1421
While not the same issue, I had a recent one that took many hours over several months to solve. It came down to a setting in the audio card driver causing the issue (which it shouldn't have).

If you can turn off all audio driver settings, it might help.

If you're doing anything remotely interesting, check to see if any calls you're making rely on something at a lower level. Sometimes there are oddities that can happen, and you may have inadvertently created something like a race condition or god knows what.
1422
Please fill in a password:
carrot

Sorry, passwords require 8 characters or more:
cooked carrot

Sorry, passwords require at least one number:
1 cooked carrot

Sorry, no spaces allowed in passwords:
50cookedcarrots

Sorry, passwords require at least one capital letter:
50FUCKINGcookedcarrots

Sorry, no subsequent capitals allowed in passwords:
50FuckingCookedCarrots

Sorry, no curse words allowed in passwords:
NowIGetReallyAngryIfMyPasswordIsStillIncorrectShoveThose50CookedCarrotsUpYourBum

Sorry, that password is already taken:
...




Hahaha!

I can relate... I hate when my passwords are rejected. Especially when the error message is something like:

Passwords must be 10 characters or less.

It's like some BOFH trying to limit passwords to match his set of rainbow tables.
1423
This is not from the Onion.

Construction mishap leads to squiggly dividers on Virginia highway

(see attachment in previous post)

This is obvious lolbertardian sabotage! :P They hate roads!
1424
Living Room / Re: Ice Bucket Challenge...You all got nominated!
« Last post by Renegade on August 26, 2014, 12:05 PM »
Wondering why I bothered posting this now...

     Me too! :P   
                I must be drunk to post LDC vids...   



1425
How many programmers does it take to change a lightbulb?

Spoiler
None, it's a hardware problem.


How many Freudian psychologists does it take to change a lightbulb?

Spoiler
Two. One to screw in the bulb and another to hold the penis I mean ladder.


How many flies does it take to screw in a light bulb?

Spoiler
Two. But who knows how they got in there.


How did the hipster burn his hand?

Spoiler
He changed the lightbulb before it was cool.


How many lawyers does it take to change a light bulb?

Spoiler
Such number as may be deemed to perform the stated task in a timely and efficient manner within the strictures of the following agreement:

Whereas the party of the first part, also known as “Lawyer,” and the party of the second part, also known as “Light Bulb,” do hereby and forthwith agree to a transaction wherein the party of the second part (Light Bulb) shall be removed from the current position as a result of failure to perform previously agreed-upon duties, i.e., the illumination of the area ranging from the front (north) door, through the entryway, terminating at an area just inside the primary living area, demarcated by the beginning of the carpet, any spillover illumination being at the option of the party of the second part (Light Bulb) and not required by the aforementioned agreement between the parties.

The aforementioned removal transaction shall include, but not be limited to, the following steps:

1.) The party of the first part (Lawyer) shall, with or without elevation, at his option, by means of a chair, stepstool, ladder, or any other means of elevation, grasp the party of the second part (Light Bulb) and rotate the party of the second part (Light Bulb) in a counterclockwise direction, said direction being non- negotiable. Said grasping and rotation of the party of the second part (Light Bulb) shall be undertaken by the party of the first part (Lawyer) with every reasonable caution by the party of the first part (Lawyer) to maintain the structural integrity of the party of the second part (Light Bulb), notwithstanding the aforementioned failure of the party of the second part (Light Bulb) to perform the aforementioned customary and agreed-upon duties. The foregoing notwithstanding, however, both parties stipulate that structural failure of the party of the second part (Light Bulb) may be incidental to the aforementioned failure to perform, and in such case the party of the first part (Lawyer) shall be held blameless for such structural failure insofar as this agreement is concerned so long as the non-negotiable directional codicil (counterclockwise) is observed by the party of the first part (Lawyer) throughout.

2.) Upon reaching a point where the party of the second part (Light Bulb) becomes separated from the party of the third part (“Receptacle”), the party of the first part (Lawyer) shall have the option of disposing of the party of the second part (Light Bulb) in a manner consistent with all applicable state, local, and federal statutes.

3.) Once separation and disposal have been achieved, the party of the first part (Lawyer) shall have the option of beginning installation of the party of the fourth part (“New Light Bulb”). This installation shall occur in a manner consistent with the reverse of the procedures described in Step 1 of this document, being careful to note that the rotation should occur in a clockwise direction, said direction also being non-negotiable.

NOTE: The above-described steps may be performed, at the option of the party of the first part (Lawyer), by said party of the first part (Lawyer), by his heirs and assigns, or by any and all persons authorized by him to do so, the objective being to produce a level of illumination in the immediate vicinity of the aforementioned front (north) door consistent with maximization of commerce and revenue for the party of the fifth part, also known as “The Firm.”


What's the difference between a pregnant woman and a lightbulb?

Spoiler
You can't unscrew a pregnant woman.


How many divorced women does it take to change a lightbulb?

Spoiler
4. 1 to change the bastard and 3 to set up a Support group


How many divorced men does it take to change a lightbulb?

Spoiler
We don't know. They are not allowed in the house.


More here. (Many NFSW ones there.)

Pages: prev1 ... 52 53 54 55 56 [57] 58 59 60 61 62 ... 438next