When is Orkut going to be dumped by Google?
-
Haroon Sarwar wrote:
but at the end of the day people should be more careful before posting all their personal details in what amounts to a public notice board...
Definitely. It is everyone's individual responsibility to take care of the issue to ensure that their personal information is not at jeopardy and having a safeguard on them assumes paramount significance in that perspective.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis LevinsonVasudevan Deepak K wrote:
It is everyone's individual responsibility to take care of the issue to ensure that their personal information is not at jeopardy
In other words, Google need not dump Orkut.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
-
Vasudevan Deepak K wrote:
It is everyone's individual responsibility to take care of the issue to ensure that their personal information is not at jeopardy
In other words, Google need not dump Orkut.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
But there should be some legislation to control and regulate this Social Networking site. We can not expect everyone to assume a self-responsible citizens. There is an important section in Indian pledge which goes like this "
India is my country. All Indians are my brothers and sisters. I Love my country. I am proud of its rich and varied culture". Since one sister of mine had been little careless, I can not ignore her and leave her at the brink of catastrophe making her a prey to sh*tty a**h**es. There should be a social responsibility from the social networking site to place a check on the menace right?Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson -
But there should be some legislation to control and regulate this Social Networking site. We can not expect everyone to assume a self-responsible citizens. There is an important section in Indian pledge which goes like this "
India is my country. All Indians are my brothers and sisters. I Love my country. I am proud of its rich and varied culture". Since one sister of mine had been little careless, I can not ignore her and leave her at the brink of catastrophe making her a prey to sh*tty a**h**es. There should be a social responsibility from the social networking site to place a check on the menace right?Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis LevinsonVasudevan Deepak K wrote:
But there should be some legislation to control and regulate this Social Networking site. We can not expect everyone to assume a self-responsible citizens. There is an important section in Indian pledge which goes like this "India is my country. All Indians are my brothers and sisters. I Love my country. I am proud of its rich and varied culture". Since one sister of mine had been little careless, I can not ignore her and leave her at the brink of catastrophe making her a prey to sh*tty a**h**es. There should be a social responsibility from the social networking site to place a check on the menace right?
You see, I wish I could go by that pledge. But then "All Indians" are not my sisters. I mean - if only you understand it.
Vasudevan Deepak K wrote:
here should be a social responsibility from the social networking site to place a check on the menace right?
The social networking portal's responsibility will be to have a "Don't show my private details to the world" checkbox.
Nobody can give you wiser advice than yourself. - Cicero .·´¯`·->Rajesh<-·´¯`·. Codeproject.com: Visual C++ MVP
-
i think orkut has introduced some privacy features which enable you to limit access to only the people you know... but at the end of the day people should be more careful before posting all their personal details in what amounts to a public notice board...
Haroon Sarwar wrote:
at the end of the day people should be more careful before posting all their personal details in what amounts to a public notice board...
In the same series, I'm surprised of the success of Facebook, and how many people are ready to throw their privacy into the public space. I'm not sure they realize all the potential consequences of divulging so much information in the wild.
Anyone who is not a misanthropist at 40 never loved men at any time Fold with us! ¤ flickr
-
Today, I saw a regional magazine here where again there was a report of a young woman was getting obscene emails and harassments because of her profile in Orkut. This is becoming a recurring issue all along. I believe, a significant chunk of countries have brought in a ban on Orkut, the underworld social networking community. When is Google going to dump it since, I apprehend it might become an eye-sore for it, sooner or later.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis LevinsonShe should have known better than to post her details on a public forum. Anyway, how difficult is it to delete her profile? I signed up on Orkut in a moment of weakness; it's downright puerile. I don't even know why I still haven't deleted it. :suss:
Cheers, Vikram.
"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong." - Mahatma Gandhi.
-
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
What's the point in whining and bitching ...
Life is tough; especially when one is a whiney [bad word] ;)
Ilíon wrote:
Life is tough; especially when one is a whiney [bad word]
You should know....
Furthermore, in Galileo's time and for quite some time afterwards, the "scientific evidence" was *against* heliocentrism. - Ilion
-
Today, I saw a regional magazine here where again there was a report of a young woman was getting obscene emails and harassments because of her profile in Orkut. This is becoming a recurring issue all along. I believe, a significant chunk of countries have brought in a ban on Orkut, the underworld social networking community. When is Google going to dump it since, I apprehend it might become an eye-sore for it, sooner or later.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson -
fat_boy wrote:
Apprehend is learn. It comes from the French word Apprendre. This of course has drifted in meaning from its original and now means to arrest someone, and in the form Apprehension, a state of mild anxiey among others. I stick to its origianl meaning of To Learn if I use it.
apprehend[^] v.tr. To take into custody; arrest: apprehended the murderer. To grasp mentally; understand: a candidate who apprehends the significance of geopolitical issues. To become conscious of, as through the emotions or senses; perceive. v.intr. To understand something. [Middle English apprehenden, from Old French apprehender, from Latin apprehendere, to seize : ad-, ad- + prehendere, to grasp.]
In other words, "to arrest" is pretty much the original meaning. The use of the word to mean "mentally grasping" (understanding) is a normal extension of meaning. I don't recall ever encountering the word used to mean "to learn."
modified on Friday, February 15, 2008 8:45 AM
-
fat_boy wrote:
It comes from the French word Apprendre
Actually the root word is "prendre" which means "to take." Like many words in both English and French, adding "A" as a suffix provides a variant meaning, in this case, "to take in" or "to take to." The definition in French has evolved so that the preferred meaning is now "to learn," although it can also be used to mean "to teach." The English have stayed closer to the original definition but, as usual, have assigned additional meanings to the word. You are correct in suggesting that "apprehend" does not mean to be(come) apprehensive. However, "apprehensive" does not connote the same emotional state as "scared" and the two should not be offered as synonymous.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
I wasnt going to go into that much detail, I just wanted to show him that his use of English is bordering on the ridiculous. Seruisly ridiculous, and making his posts hard to understand. I dont know whether its somehting Indians do alot or not, others I know speak plainly, but there is a temptation in English to use Latin/French based words inplace of Old English words because the speaker feels that to do so is more correct. Of oucrse it is just a pompous affectation that needs stamping on at every opportunity.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Check this out: http://www.google.co.in/search?hl=en&q=define%3A+apprehend&meta=[^]
**Definitions of apprehend on the Web: grok: get the meaning of something; "Do you comprehend the meaning of this letter?" collar: take into custody; "the police nabbed the suspected criminals" anticipate with dread or anxiety wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn**Vasudevan Deepak Kumar Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis LevinsonYeah, I know it now means a number of things, thats why I advised you not to use it. Not only is it unneccessarially fancy, it is also ambiguous. If you mean 'fear' then write 'fear'. Do you know 'nice' once meant something bad? And that 'fullsome' that used to be negative a few decades ago is now a compliment? It is always good to avoid words that are ambiguous, or are used wrongly. If possible stick to plain simple English.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
OK, I know its diddifcult for you, but try to imagine 'mentally grasping'.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Yeah, I know it now means a number of things, thats why I advised you not to use it. Not only is it unneccessarially fancy, it is also ambiguous. If you mean 'fear' then write 'fear'. Do you know 'nice' once meant something bad? And that 'fullsome' that used to be negative a few decades ago is now a compliment? It is always good to avoid words that are ambiguous, or are used wrongly. If possible stick to plain simple English.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Do you know 'nice' once meant something bad?
That was a long time ago.
fat_boy wrote:
And that 'fullsome' that used to be negative a few decades ago is now a compliment?
It isn't a compliment. Incorrect usage (based on ignorance) or incorrect understanding of correct usage may have introduced an element of ambiguity to common use/understanding of the word, but it is still a long way from actually being a complimentary word.
-
I wasnt going to go into that much detail, I just wanted to show him that his use of English is bordering on the ridiculous. Seruisly ridiculous, and making his posts hard to understand. I dont know whether its somehting Indians do alot or not, others I know speak plainly, but there is a temptation in English to use Latin/French based words inplace of Old English words because the speaker feels that to do so is more correct. Of oucrse it is just a pompous affectation that needs stamping on at every opportunity.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
Seruisly ridiculous, and making his posts hard to understand. I dont know whether its somehting Indians do alot or not, others I know speak plainly, but there is a temptation in English to use Latin/French based words inplace of Old English words because the speaker feels that to do so is more correct. Of oucrse it is just a pompous affectation that needs stamping on at every opportunity.
Serious is derived from the Latin, seriosus. Temptation is from the Lating, temptare. Correct is from the Latin, correctus. Affectation is from the Latin, afficere Opportunity is from the Latin, portentum Perhaps you should stamp yourself before demanding that someone else decide to stop using much of the glory of the English language?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
fat_boy wrote:
Seruisly ridiculous, and making his posts hard to understand. I dont know whether its somehting Indians do alot or not, others I know speak plainly, but there is a temptation in English to use Latin/French based words inplace of Old English words because the speaker feels that to do so is more correct. Of oucrse it is just a pompous affectation that needs stamping on at every opportunity.
Serious is derived from the Latin, seriosus. Temptation is from the Lating, temptare. Correct is from the Latin, correctus. Affectation is from the Latin, afficere Opportunity is from the Latin, portentum Perhaps you should stamp yourself before demanding that someone else decide to stop using much of the glory of the English language?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
I don't blame you for having a hissy-fit. It must really suck trying to put other people down for their word choice when you are practically illiterate. Guess you'll have to find something else to help you compensate.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
I don't blame you for having a hissy-fit. It must really suck trying to put other people down for their word choice when you are practically illiterate. Guess you'll have to find something else to help you compensate.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
fat_boy wrote:
Seruisly ridiculous, and making his posts hard to understand. I dont know whether its somehting Indians do alot or not, others I know speak plainly, but there is a temptation in English to use Latin/French based words inplace of Old English words because the speaker feels that to do so is more correct. Of oucrse it is just a pompous affectation that needs stamping on at every opportunity.
Serious is derived from the Latin, seriosus. Temptation is from the Lating, temptare. Correct is from the Latin, correctus. Affectation is from the Latin, afficere Opportunity is from the Latin, portentum Perhaps you should stamp yourself before demanding that someone else decide to stop using much of the glory of the English language?
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
Let me explain a little further. English is NOT derrived from Latin. To state then that the English 'serious' is derrived from Latin is bollocks. English IS derrived from French (in part. Well, actually Norman French) and thats where these words come from. On top of that there was a Latinisation of English in the 17th century giving it much of what you mistake for Latin.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Let me explain a little further. English is NOT derrived from Latin. To state then that the English 'serious' is derrived from Latin is bollocks. English IS derrived from French (in part. Well, actually Norman French) and thats where these words come from. On top of that there was a Latinisation of English in the 17th century giving it much of what you mistake for Latin.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
English is NOT derrived from Latin.
This is like saying that you are not related to your grandfather, only to your father.
fat_boy wrote:
To state then that the English 'serious' is derrived from Latin is bollocks
Mirriam-Webster Dictionary wrote:
Etymology: Middle English seryows, from Anglo-French or Late Latin; Anglo-French serious, from Late Latin seriosus, alteration of Latin serius weighty, serious
Oooop, wrong again, aren't you?
fat_boy wrote:
On top of that there was a Latinisation of English in the 17th century.
Most people refer to this as the Renaissance. (Which is a French word coined from Latin renasci, (from re- + nasci: to be born.)) It was indeed a time when many words now in common use first entered the language. I am at a loss, however to understand how loan words that first appear in the 1600's taken from Latin - which I remind you was still the official language of the Catholic church and of international diplomacy and which was spoken by many Englishmen and understood by more) is somehow only mistaken for Latin - what is it in reality, Hebrew??? Give it up - quick googles will never give you enough background in the subject to allow you to form a cogent argument.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
fat_boy wrote:
English is NOT derrived from Latin.
This is like saying that you are not related to your grandfather, only to your father.
fat_boy wrote:
To state then that the English 'serious' is derrived from Latin is bollocks
Mirriam-Webster Dictionary wrote:
Etymology: Middle English seryows, from Anglo-French or Late Latin; Anglo-French serious, from Late Latin seriosus, alteration of Latin serius weighty, serious
Oooop, wrong again, aren't you?
fat_boy wrote:
On top of that there was a Latinisation of English in the 17th century.
Most people refer to this as the Renaissance. (Which is a French word coined from Latin renasci, (from re- + nasci: to be born.)) It was indeed a time when many words now in common use first entered the language. I am at a loss, however to understand how loan words that first appear in the 1600's taken from Latin - which I remind you was still the official language of the Catholic church and of international diplomacy and which was spoken by many Englishmen and understood by more) is somehow only mistaken for Latin - what is it in reality, Hebrew??? Give it up - quick googles will never give you enough background in the subject to allow you to form a cogent argument.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
English is a Germanic language (from Old Norse and Old Saxon) with some words from Norman French and then heavially Latinised in the 17th century. Period.
Oakman wrote:
Oooop, wrong again, aren't you?
You really are a tool arent you? Tell me, when you eat cow are you eating grass? After all, that what cows eat isnt it.
Oakman wrote:
which I remind you was still the official language of the Catholic church and of international diplomacy
Actually French was the language of international diplomacy. Actually, it still is today in some respects.
Oakman wrote:
quick googles will never give you enough background in the subject to allow you to form a cogent argument
I assume you are familiar with this then. Tell you what, you have 30 seconds to state some differences between Norman French and Parisien French.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
English is a Germanic language (from Old Norse and Old Saxon) with some words from Norman French and then heavially Latinised in the 17th century. Period.
Oakman wrote:
Oooop, wrong again, aren't you?
You really are a tool arent you? Tell me, when you eat cow are you eating grass? After all, that what cows eat isnt it.
Oakman wrote:
which I remind you was still the official language of the Catholic church and of international diplomacy
Actually French was the language of international diplomacy. Actually, it still is today in some respects.
Oakman wrote:
quick googles will never give you enough background in the subject to allow you to form a cogent argument
I assume you are familiar with this then. Tell you what, you have 30 seconds to state some differences between Norman French and Parisien French.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
fat_boy wrote:
English is a Germanic language (from Old Norse and Old Saxon) with some words from Norman French and then heavially Latinised in the 17th century. Period.
The only period there is the one you're having. Old English - the last time English could be considered Germanic contained less than 100,000 words - many of them are no longer used. English by the end of the 16th century contain in excess of 300,000 words - most of them Latinate in origin. (Google may not have mentioned this, but French is considered to be a Latin language.) Today, English contains in excess of 600,000 words - most of them Latinate.
fat_boy wrote:
Tell me, when you eat cow are you eating grass? After all, that what cows eat isnt it
You don't know shit about biology, either, do you? I haven't got the time, the energy, or the inclination to explain the food chain to you.
fat_boy wrote:
Tell you what, you have 30 seconds to state some differences between Norman French and Parisien French.
This "look up the answer on Google and then ask the question" may really impress the crap out of the other teenies you hang out with in chat rooms, but it is simply ludicrous here. I'm done. I have revealed for any who want to see the paucity of your knowledge in case anyone took your unkind words that started this thread to heart. I won't be notified if you waste bandwidth responding, so please feel free to be as much of a twit as you wish to be.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface