My point is, it was called "spam" because it was repetitive and clogging up forums (e.g. cross-posting the same ad to 1000 different newsgroups), not because it was unsolicited. Not even because it was commercial; people got chastised for "spamming" multiple newsgroups even if their message was on topic in a group or two. And every new thread someone starts is technically "unsolicited."

So unsolicited commercial emails are a form of spam, but not the only one.

If that's a perfect example then this simply proves you don't know what spam is. Spam is unsolicited e-mail

The term originally meant any message repeated to excess in newsgroups, chat rooms and forums. It was a reference to Monty Python, whence "Spam, Spam, Spam Spam..."

When people started getting their e-mail inboxes flooded with commercial e-mails, they called that "spam" too, but the confusion led to the more specific term "unsolicited commercial email" (UCE) being introduced, not leastwise because Hormel objected to their brand name being misused.

I think methane is the way to go. It's the simplest hydrocarbon, it can be converted to liquid (LNG) or methanol for transport, and we already have the infrastructure to handle it.

Plus, it can be made from water and atmospheric CO2 . There are already bacteria doing it with nothing but electricity. We just need to hack the little buggers and see how they're doing it.

"However, dither doesn't change the fact that once a signal sinks below the noise floor, it should effectively disappear. How is the -105dB tone still clearly audible above a -96dB noise floor?

"The answer: Our -96dB noise floor figure is effectively wrong; we're using an inappropriate definition of dynamic range. (6*bits)dB gives us the RMS noise of the entire broadband signal, but each hair cell in the ear is sensitive to only a narrow fraction of the total bandwidth. As each hair cell hears only a fraction of the total noise floor energy, the noise floor at that hair cell will be much lower than the broadband figure of -96dB.

"Thus, 16 bit audio can go considerably deeper than 96dB. With use of shaped dither, which moves quantization noise energy into frequencies where it's harder to hear, the effective dynamic range of 16 bit audio reaches 120dB in practice [13], more than fifteen times deeper than the 96dB claim.

"120dB is greater than the difference between a mosquito somewhere in the same room and a jackhammer a foot away.... or the difference between a deserted 'soundproof' room and a sound loud enough to cause hearing damage in seconds.

"16 bits is enough to store all we can hear, and will be enough forever."

http://people.xiph.org/~xiphmont/demo/neil-young.html

Yep, the bible is interpreted exactly the same as it was 2000 years ago.

The Bible isn't interpreted. It was compiled.

Our boss gave a curt ultimatum:
"Don't make dick jokes near people who hate 'em."
    "If you act like a boor
    We will show you the door."
(We can fire them, since we can't castrate 'em)

Yes! Screw paying the artist. They're already starving a little less income can't hurt.

Wait, are you arguing for the publishers' side? It's kinda hard to tell.

Unfortunately, the achievement they honored is marred by being the worst application development environment ever conceived.

Not sure if you're talking about the WWW or TCP/IP or what... but the WWW was never conceived as an application development environment. That was clumsily hot-glued on later. It was originally just a protocol for serving hypertext documents. Of course it was just fine for that purpose.

Finally, it doesn't matter that they can't talk... you can ask a fish head anything you want to!

I'm Message Approval Man, and I approve this message.