These people left debris on my car in a rainstorm. The garbage ( a cardboard flyer ) is adhering to my windshield. I was just hung up on calling to complain. Naturally, there was no phone number on the garbage left on my car, simply a web site and instructions to order high priced glasses ( which I don’t wear ) from dishonest people.
Is it legal to dump garbage on another person’s car?
On the 200th birthday of Charles Darwin, it’s interesting to note that so many historic figures are given their own holiday, it’s impossible to keep them straight. Presidents’ Day is the canonical example. Yet Darwin, certainly the most important scientist to emerge from the UK (yes, including Newton) and perhaps the man who had the greatest idea in all of history, has no holiday in his honor. It’s ironic.
SQL Server offers a number of ways to get at your data. You don’t explicitly choose – it has options, and it picks the most applicable data access method for a query and the structure of the data. I think our state of the art knowledge of cognitive science doesn’t understand the specifics, and I was thinking about how this works as an analogy.
It’ll use a mix; if you ask for two predicates (state == ‘ca’ && last_name == ‘kaku‘) with an and, it will perform the most limiting first, then verify only that set against the most permissive. That’s the most economical solution available.
The English language doesn’t have a word for schadenfreude. Usually when somebody says language X doesn’t have a word for Y, you won’t normally lose money betting against them. The implication is that people who use that language don’t understand the concept being that word, as if Americans couldn’t comprehend the sister of your girlfriend. But what if I said English doesn’t have a word for the sister of your father? You would say “That sounds like your aunt.” And you’d have the answer pretty quickly – obviously you’re “hitting an index” and only even considering a fraction of the words available that might mean that.
Could you do something like a table scan of/in the mind, if you wanted to? Say you want to list all the words you know, or even the names of all the people you know? I don’t think that’s possible. It’s not because we forget – this stuff comes back instantly, in context. It just doesn’t seem to be organized to be available out of context.
How is it that a few months ago, any fewer that $700 billion was just too little, for a bailout, but today, $800 billion is too much?
For his part, Obama gave us an itemized list for how he intends to use the money. Paulson derived his figure with chicken’s blood and some eye of newt.
America survived eight years of Bush, though at great injury. Obama will have to channel FDR to right our ailing economy. The larger economy has just experienced what California went through when GWB set Enron loose on us.
Our incomming attorney general asserts that torture is illegal – what a refreshing change!
The world presumes that illegal spying on American citizens will end immediately, as Gitmo is shut down, and that troops will come home from Iraq in the none too distant future. Tupac Shakur said “only time reveals,” and we’ll see how these things play out.
After the dark ages of George Bush Junior, America has nowhere to go but up.
I declare this distinction unofficially dead. 300 years ago, choosing the wrong form could get you into disrepute, forever ending one’s status as a lady or gentleman. Today, knowing when to use one or the other marks a person as a word watcher.
Imagine asking your child “Whom did you play with at school today?” (This usage is alleged to be correct.) If you can’t imagine teaching this to your children, it’s moribund if it isn’t already dead.
Even the most staunch “defender of language” will admit that questions just aren’t begun with whom. William Safire, a more sober advisor of linguistics, suggests “When faced with a choice between the pedantic and the incorrect, recast the sentence”.
The “correct” usage, by the way, has a simple rule. Practice a different version of the sentence. If you would say he, use who and you, but if you would say him, use whom and ye. Who and you and he are subject pronouns, while whom and ye and him are object pronouns. You would say “you love him” not “you love he” and so the question ought to be “whom do you love?” That would have made for a disappointing blues song, though.
Finally, let’s get to the meat. Whom is dead, but how can we really tell? Native English speakers don’t use it. Like “Ebonics,” whom is simply not Standard English. Languages evolve, while some constructions (ye, whom, though sayeth, verb last as in “with this ring I thee wed”) die, and others are born.
No native speaker says “I running” or “John Mary kissed” or “who was playing with John and?” Even 3 year olds avoid these errors most of the time, because these really are errors. Refusing to split one’s infinitives may be a sign of education, but it’s not a part of the English language. If it were a fundamental part of the language, nobody would have to explain it to you, because you’d already know and obey it.
They were mentioned on Family Guy, Fox’s stoner cartoon show. Seth Green likes gags, especially cutting to a bizarre interpretation of something that was just said. Peter’s fantasy was for a suicide bomber to be “unpleasantly surprised” to find out the virgins waiting for him are the wrong gender.
We’ve geekily listened to Dicken’s A Christmas Charol as a radio drama, donated blankets, quilts, and winter coats to the homeless, and had a mass with friends. I’ve been reading about Christmas in other cultures, from Italy’s La Befana, who set out to bring gifts to Jesus, got lost, and now brings presents for all children, to Blue Winds Dancing, a Native American story of family togetherness, and harmony with the world. This is a time for human goodness, charity, and a sense of common purpose in the world.
Merry Christmas to all!
Alexander The Great 