Here.

By websearch, this is the Addams family motto, "We gladly feast upon those who would subdue us."

http://science.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=6635389&cid=48739641

http://www.latin-dictionary.org/Si_hoc_legere_scis_nimium_eruditionis_habes
http://www.archives.nd.edu/cgi-bin/wordz.pl?keyword=Si+hoc+legere+nimium+eruditionis+habes
If this to read too much learning you have.

From many, blood

Here.

In the beginning was the word. Biblical, John 1:1. The full verse is
"In principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum. "
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

here

I think, therefore I shall eat pizza.

I'm not sure about subtleties in the grammar. I think pizza should be declined as pizzam, but that would make it harder for non-Latin readers to get the point.

Here.

Clearly derived from "Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam" which gets its own Wikipedia page.

This raises the question - how should Facebook be declined? My answer - just don't sign up for it.

If they aren't even on board with this, I can't imagine they'll be a fan of my other anti-code injection security proposal, IOR (Instruction Order Randomization).

Guess nobody around here has heard of agile programming.

Here.

By web search: "Whatever it is, I fear the girls, even when they kiss."

I can't find a source, but presumably a reference to
Vergil, Aeinid II.49
QUIDQUID ID EST, TIMEO DANAOS ET DONA FERENTES.
Whatever it is, I fear the Greeks, even bearing gifts.

vos nescitis quicquam, nec cogitatis quia expedit nobis ut unus moriatur homo pro populo et non tota gens pereat here.

Biblical, "You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the people than that the whole nation perish." John 11:50 (spoken by an antagonist.)

here.

It seems fractured, but I think
My Latin sig is criminal because I think stupid people are sane and clever.

In the last week or two links to external sites on Slashdot generally don't seem to work unless I click several times. This only appears to happen on Firefox... Chrome is unaffected. I haven't tried IE, Safari, or any other browser. Finally fed up with it, I decided to look through the javascript to see if there was anything funky going on. Looks like there's a script being included from leads.demandbase.com that defines some kind of click tracker. Here's a snippet:

• else if(a[i].className.match(/clicky_log_outbound/i)){clicky.add_event(a[i],"mousedown",clicky.outbound);}else{clicky.add_event(a[i],"mousedown",clicky.click);

So if you find you've oddly had to click a few times to RTFA, it's not your mouse button dying. Open up adblock and disable everything from leads.demandbase.com and it will be fixed. Links clicked once in Firefox will properly load as they used to. Thanks Slashdot for using an external company for tracking my click behavior. Though perhaps implementing this poorly is Taco's way of giving us a heads-up. Much like the "Idle" section, his overlords may have mandated the addition of this awesomeness to the site and by making it break it alerts us to what we need to block. In which case, a non-sarcastic thanks is due.

I also found this wonderful gem:

• function pageload_done( $, console, maybe ){
          pageload.after_readycode = (new Date).getTime();
          pageload.content_ready_time = pageload.content_ready - pageload.before_content;
          pageload.script_ready_time = pageload.after_readycode - pageload.content_ready;
          pageload.ready_time = pageload.after_readycode - pageload.before_content; // Only report 1% of cases.
          maybe || (Math.random()>0.01) || $.ajax({ data: {
                  op: 'page_profile',
                  pagemark: pageload.pagemark,
                  dom: pageload.content_ready_time,
                  js: pageload.script_ready_time
          } });
  }

Unless my javascript is really rusty, won't this report 99% of cases?

Anyway, pass this information on so everyone can RTFA without the hassle.

But only after "socio-economic parity" has been achieved.....

Six Brits arrested for burning Qurans

It's amazing how people try to rationalize away the phrase "I could care less", much in the same way that Star Wars apologists try to rationalize the use of parsecs when talking about the Kessel Run. Maybe there are black holes to navigate around, and minimizing the distance is the sign of a good pilot, or maybe this, or maybe that... or maybe George Lucas just made a mistake, you know?

So when it comes to people rationalizing away "I could care less" as being some nonchalant way of saying "yeah, I could but I'm not going to bother" I just don't buy it. It's a misquote of the perfectly unambiguous phrase "I couldn't care less". So when I stumbled across a rationalization of that, my mind wandered upon what I think is a pretty damned good analogy of why it doesn't make sense: I could eat more.

Many commentators seem to believe that the Tea Party represents a net minus for the GOP because of the split between them and the existing establishment. This criticism seems oddly familiar to me. Many people predicted that the drawn out fight between Hillary and Obama would be the death of the Democrats in 2008. As it turned out, that extended fight kept them in the news for months and built up the ground networks that helped Obama carry the day in states that normally be out of reach for a Democrat. Take Indiana, where Obama carried the state by ~28k votes. Does that happen without the ground operation built for the primary and the name recognition/publicity gained from it? Impossible to say, but I think it's clear that the intra-party squabbling was a net positive for the Democrats in the end.

It seems likely to me that the Tea Party will have the same impact on the GOP. They may well prove to be a net minus in selected races (Delaware) but the enthusiasm they've generated and the new people they've brought into the political process will more than balance that out come November.