Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:So Proud of Gun Ownership (Score 1) 1232

It did take on a new meaning, then lose that meaning. I'm not sure how best to characterize that meaning, but I do have evidence it existed. From the Oxford English Dictionary:

âb.b Of troops: Properly disciplined. Obs. rareâ"1.

ÂÂÂ1690 Lond. Gaz. No. 2568/3 We hear likewise that the French are in a great Allarm in Dauphine and Bresse, not having at present 1500 Men of regulated Troops on that side.

(Yes, Slashdot will probably have munged a few of those characters. It's a copy + paste from the electronic edition.)

At any rate, I disagree that it's strange for a word to gain a new meaning and lose that new meaning. It doesn't require extraordinary evidence because it's simply not that unusual. Note however that the word never lost its old meaning, so it didn't "revert"; it merely lost the new meaning.

Comment Re:SEC (Score 1) 135

Actually, no. Twitter has protected tweets which are viewable only by approved followers, as well as direct messages viewable only by sender and recipient. There are, in fact, people who use Twitter without posting any public messages at all.

I don't really understand what point you were trying to make with this public/private distinction, but I thought I'd correct the factual error.

Comment Antarctica? Middelfart? (Score 0, Troll) 372

Mr. Williamson promptly left Apple headquarters in Antarctica, and walked to his home in Middelfart, Denmark."

I don't get it. Is this some kind of humor, or some kind of random gibberish added to the submission to see if anyone notices?

Maybe the submitter was trying to see if the editors were paying attention . . . ?

Comment Re:Interesting study but needs replication (Score 1) 85

That's not eidetic. I'm a musician myself, and I've memorized over a thousand songs, and I can in fact "play them back" in my head, for the most part. My memory is good, but it works the same way as everyone else's.

Want proof? Listen to a completely random sequence of notes for five minutes, then try to play the entire thing back in your head in order. You can't do it, because you failed to chunk it as you listened, and the input was many times larger than your phonological loop could accommodate.

Further, your brain has no way of storing an actual recording. What you hear when you listen depends entirely on what you paid attention to. See e.g. the MgCurk effect. You might also be interested in JJ's explanation of how perception influences what we hear and remember.

Slashdot Top Deals

The first version always gets thrown away.