• (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    Oh come now, hysterical overexaggeration is a popular technique - remember McCarthyism?

    Why would you think I was exaggerating? That actually happened. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=62d_1318118421

    There was a lot of theft, robbery, and sexual assault going on in those camps, too, but, amazingly, every single instance that was reported on was perpetrated by someone who wasn't one of the occupiers. And if you believe that I have some lakefront property in Arizona to sell you.

  • (disco) in reply to tarunik
    tarunik:
    Or it can mean you have a ton of ground to cover -- see for instance Electromagnetic Compatiblity Engineering -- it's about as fat as anything you were having trouble digesting, but it is that way because it needs to cover such a broad problem space.

    You're being serious now. I wasn't...though from the reactions some people didn't get that. It isn't trolling if you don't intend to get someone to bite. I was on an EMC working group in the late 80s (I had been modeling lightning effects on telecoms equipment...a fun job because we built some simulation gear) and I remember thinking then it was a huge can of worms because there was simply so much existing equipment made to so many conflicting standards. I don't remember that particular book, but there was tonnes of stuff to wade through, much of it read on trains. Fortunately the Government was paying for me to go first class. Yes, I have my shelves of fat textbooks. Now I'm retired a lot of them are history; anyone who thinks Macaulay was wordy should look at what comes out nowadays. But engineering, science and history convey information. When the Soviet Union collapsed, we started to learn a whole lot of new stuff about, for instance, the second World War - it was illuminating and perspectives shifted. The problem I find with imagined worlds is that they are always shallower than the real one, and so ultimately unsatisfying. Tolkien might not have thought through the actual operation of his bijou world, but we know that was a lack of understanding and knowledge on the part of one man, while the Allies' failure to respond quickly to the collapse of Mussolini, and their failure to advance rapidly on Rome, was a failure of intelligent people for a variety of reasons which historians still are analysing. I guess I'm a bit of an intellectual snob, but it saddens me that people seem to be satisfied with the cartoonish Hollywood world when there is a real one, with huge depth, which can be endlessly explored.

    tarunik:
    Trust me -- heavy-ion beams can destroy in a way very few other things can

    Yes, someone should try and see what happens if you accelerate some large hadrons and collide them. We might learn something.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    remember McCarthyism

    McCarthy was right!

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    totQuot homines tot sententiae
    How many men; that many opinions.
    kupfernigk:
    mega biblion mega kakon

    Μέγα βιβλίον μέγα κακόν — Big book, big evil. Strictly speaking, "a big book is a very bad thing," or "A big book is a big evil" would be "μέγα βιβλίον εἴναι μέγα κακόν." Or in Modern Greek, "μέγα βιβλίον είναι μέγα κακόν," since Modern Greek no longer uses the psili. Arguably, even more correct would be to dispense with the diacritics entirely, since they were only just beginning to come into use in the time of Καλλίμαχος, and didn't gain widespread use until centuries later.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    I don't remember that particular book, but there was tonnes of stuff to wade through, much of it read on trains.

    That's because it's a newer edition, more or less -- the book you probably ran into was Noise Reduction Techniques in Electronic Systems :blush: (Same author, somewhat different vintage)

    kupfernigk:
    I guess I'm a bit of an intellectual snob, but it saddens me that people seem to be satisfied with the cartoonish Hollywood world when there is a real one, with huge depth, which can be endlessly explored.
    Speaking as a roleplayer -- sometimes the best opportunities for writing lie in drawing from reality, instead of handwaving it away wholesale. Then again, sometimes exploring the unreal can be useful to give us perspective on what the bounds of reality *mean*, if you will...

    (Agreed that mainline fictional media can be fairly cartoonish, though)

  • (disco) in reply to tarunik
    tarunik:
    Then again, sometimes exploring the unreal can be useful to give us perspective on what the bounds of reality mean, if you will

    I agree. Time travel is the best example I can think of. Time travel enables certain story themes, but cannot be used in a story without a ton of hand-waiving.

    Also, reality is complicated and messy and sometimes that's the story you want to tell. However, some stories are better told in a more black and white world.

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    HardwareGeek:
    totQuot homines tot sententiae

    How many men; that many opinions.

    I hang my head in deep shame...my memory is on the way out obviously.
    HardwareGeek:
    kupfernigk: mega biblion mega kakon

    Μέγα βιβλίον μέγα κακόν — Big book, big evil. Strictly speaking, "a big book is a very bad thing," or "A big book is a big evil" would be "μέγα βιβλίον εἴναι μέγα κακόν." Or in Modern Greek, "μέγα βιβλίον είναι μέγα κακόν," since Modern Greek no longer uses the psili. Arguably, even more correct would be to dispense with the diacritics entirely, since they were only just beginning to come into use in the time of Καλλίμαχος, and didn't gain widespread use until centuries later.

    Thank you for the clarification, though I'm not quite sure what enlightenment has thereby been created. The omission of the third person present singular of "to be" is a common contraction in many languages and I refuse to obsess over it. If I'm going to be strict when casually referencing well known tags I'll do it somewhere more formal than a site called thedailywtf. Terentius though...I am slipping. Senility obviously beckons. It's just as well I don't need to try to read Perl these days.

  • (disco) in reply to boomzilla
    boomzilla:
    McCarthy was right!

    There were reds under the bed? Occupy was an existential threat to the United States of America? Hoover dressed up in women's underwear?

    Which of these is correct?

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    Thank you for the clarification, though I'm not quite sure what enlightenment has thereby been created.

    Η σχολαστικότητα, από μόνη της, είναι καλἠ. "Pedantry is its own good." That the reader obtains enlightenment thereby is very desirable; it is the fulfillment of the pedantry. Nevertheless, pedantry remains intrinsically good, regardless whether the reader has sufficient wisdom to benefit from it.

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    HardwareGeek:
    Nevertheless, pedantry remains intrinsically good, regardless whether the reader has sufficient wisdom to benefit from it.

    And to that put-down I make only one observation; σχολαστικότητα can mean pedantry but it can also mean meticulousness (which in science, engineering or software is clearly good) but it can also mean bookishness or fussiness. To understand the sentence, we need to know the context. The Scholastics were of course accused of pedantry and bookishness. The problem they were trying to solve was that they were attempting to have meaningful discussions about things for which there was as yet no words, and they had fallen into the same trap with respect to Aristotle as the theologians had with respect to the Bible. In the end, it wasn't the Scholastics that gave rise to modern science but the Alchemists and the instrument makers, because they were trying to find words to express actual phneomena.

    I would argue therefore that you have mistranslated the sentence for effect; pedantry, an excessive affectation of correctness, is what meticulousness becomes when it has become an end in itself with no benefit.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk

    Well done, sir. Have a :checkered_flag:.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    I would argue therefore that you have mistranslated the sentence for effect;
    I'm going to blame any mistranslation, at least of the word you are complaining about, on Google. I spent a fair amount of effort trying to get the rest of the sentence into Greek with the right meaning — a naïve translation of "its own good" appeared to convey possession or ownership, rather than intended sense of being intrinsically good — but I accepted Google's translation of "pedantry" at face value.
    kupfernigk:
    pedantry, an excessive affectation of correctness, is what meticulousness becomes when it has become an end in itself
    Exactly; pedantry *is* an end in itself.
    kupfernigk:
    To understand the sentence, we need to know the context.
    We have the context: explanation that pedantry is an end in itself, regardless of any enlightenment that may or may not result from it.
  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    HardwareGeek:
    to get the rest of the sentence to get the rest of the sentence

    Repeat yourself much?

  • (disco) in reply to HardwareGeek
    HardwareGeek:
    Well done, sir. Have a :checkered_flag:.

    We have a category for such comments, you know. ;)

  • (disco) in reply to abarker
    abarker:
    Repeat yourself much?

    FIXED. I'm not quite sure how I managed to do that, but apparently I failed to proofread.

    Filed under: KEEP CLAM AND PROOF READ

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    I'm going to blame any mistranslation, at least of the word you are complaining about, on Google. I spent a fair amount of effort trying to get the rest of the sentence into Greek with the right meaning — a naïve translation of "its own good" appeared to convey possession or ownership, rather than intended sense of being intrinsically good — but I accepted Google's translation of "pedantry" at face value.

    And there was me thinking I had accidentally aroused the grammarian in a Greek scholar, a terrifying breed (my professor used to shout at me really quite loudly) who I suspected would be happier in a day when you could whip your slower pupils. For those who don't know, the eccentric British politician Enoch Powell was one of these. One of his former pupils, who at one time became Prime Minister of Australia, referred to him as a "textual maniac".

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    And there was me thinking I had accidentally aroused the grammarian in a Greek scholar

    I have studied a little Greek — enough to know that Google using a genitive pronoun in its translation of "its own good" was not really what I wanted — but I am definitely not a "Greek scholar."

    kupfernigk:
    whip your slower pupils
    I don't think I want this. I grasp the concepts, and to some extent the vocabulary, pretty quickly, but I simply haven't the patience for the rote memorization of the declensions and conjugations.
  • (disco) in reply to FrostCat
    FrostCat:
    Why would you think I was exaggerating? That actually happened.

    I was alluding to the ridiculous events in the Batman film, just as McCarthy ridiculously overexaggerated the "Red threat" - and as did Hoover. It's trying to create a climate of fear to manipulate people. Goebbels didn't invent it but he certainly provided the blueprints.

    Occupy wasn't left wing - it was anarchist. I'm not sure what the Tea Party is or was, but from my safe European perspective I'm less worried about idiots crapping on police cars than idiots waving guns and demanding the right to shoot first. I wouldn't want to get involved with either.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    waving guns and demanding the right to shoot first.

    Nobody's actually advocating that. You might want to watch out for ridiculous overexaggerations.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    waving guns and demanding the right to shoot first.

    Might want to check your propaganda. ;)

  • (disco) in reply to FrostCat
    FrostCat:
    Nobody's actually advocating that.

    So what does the "Stand your ground" law mean then? Am I missing some subtlety? And those pictures we saw of the Tea Partiers certainly showed a number of them waving guns in demonstrations. Perhaps you could explain coherently where the exaggeration lies.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    So what does the "Stand your ground" law mean then?

    Disclaimer: IANAL

    In states without Stand Your Ground laws, you are expected to try and escape from the threat before using deadly force, or show that such escape was not possible. In states with Stand Your Ground laws, no such obligation exists. In all states the best course of action is to try and deescalate the situation before using your weapon, though this is not always viable and you may be forced to shoot first.

    Edit: Additional info:

    Many states have enacted so-called stand your ground laws that remove the duty to retreat before using force in self-defense. Florida passed the first such law in 2005, generally allowing people to stand their ground instead of retreating if they reasonably believe doing so will "prevent death or great bodily harm."

    Other states followed with laws specifically affirming one's right to defend themselves, even outside of their homes and with deadly force if necessary. The wording of each state's laws will vary, but typically require you to have the right to be at a location.[1]

    kupfernigk:
    Am I missing some subtlety?

    Apparently.

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk
    kupfernigk:
    So what does the "Stand your ground" law mean then? Am I missing some subtlety?

    It's very simple. Stand your ground means if you are in a place you have a right to be, you do not have a duty to retreat before attempting to defend yourself.

    I'll give you an example that comes from a guy teaching a concealed carry permit class: guy working in a store gets robbed. He shoots the robber. The robber sues him and at trial points out the guy could have piled up some furniture and then climbed up on it to get out a ceiling-height window in the back of the store, and won, because the state had a duty to retreat law.

    DtR can be twisted to say you may not defend yourself if you have any, however improbable, potential escape route. SyG puts the onus on the attacker.

    kupfernigk:
    And those pictures we saw of the Tea Partiers certainly showed a number of them waving guns in demonstrations.

    First, I question your use of the word "waving", but that's an entirely different situation. SyG/DtR involves someone attacking you. Open carry doesn't.

  • (disco) in reply to aliceif
    aliceif:
    Um, actually ... [image]

    makemashita

  • (disco) in reply to tharpa

    I know you were looking forward to people analyzing this weird and making fun of it, so I'll run your fun by translating it: It's Japanese for "I lose/lost"

  • (disco) in reply to kupfernigk

    Also someone should try putting a large hadron through the one ring, just to see what happens.

  • (disco)
  • (disco) in reply to ben_lubar

    This article or section has been rated D for Dwarf.

    I approve of such a rating scheme.

  • (disco) in reply to FrostCat

    TRWTF is a "guy working in a store" carrying a lethal weapon. I'm sorry but that's just asking for trouble. Let the robber take the money and let the insurance and the police sort it out afterward. Seriously.

  • Dieter H (unregistered)

    Not really a WTF. A WIP to process improvement.

Leave a comment on “The Batman”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article