The Free Dictionary  
mailing list For webmasters
Welcome Guest Forum Search | Active Topics | Members

Profile: Y111
About
User Name: Y111
Forum Rank: Advanced Member
Gender: Male
Statistics
Joined: Sunday, June 25, 2017
Last Visit: Saturday, December 7, 2019 7:57:31 AM
Number of Posts: 351
[0.04% of all post / 0.37 posts per day]
Avatar
  Last 10 Posts
Topic: on to the escalator
Posted: Saturday, December 7, 2019 7:57:30 AM
OK, thank you!
Topic: on to the escalator
Posted: Saturday, December 7, 2019 5:15:03 AM
Yes, thar, you are right about the meaning of my question. And, just like you, I was puzzled as to what, or who, he had to push after he had pushed through the crowds, so I thought it was more logical to read 'on to' as 'onto'. Dictionaries say it can be written either way, hence the ambiguity.

Maybe the escalator was also crowded but he didn't see those people as another crowd to push through.
Topic: on to the escalator
Posted: Saturday, December 7, 2019 3:23:21 AM
I pushed through the crowds and on to the escalator.

Which meaning seems more natural?

1. and pushed (on to the escalator)
2. and (pushed on) to the escalator
Topic: Thanks. vs Thanks!
Posted: Friday, October 4, 2019 12:49:44 AM
I think it's only natural to feel a bit excited if a total stranger does you a favor. They are not paid for it and it's not their duty. They are simply being kind to you. Shouldn't you show them that you really appreciate it?

Personally, if I have tried to help someone and then see a cold 'thank you.' in response, I am not even sure I really helped them. Maybe they are just being polite but my advice wasn't really useful or needed as much as it seemed. So I feel like I have wasted my time and effort, at least partly, and I get less motivated to help that person again.

Maybe it's just me or my different culture, but I think it's safer and therefore wiser not to economize on exclamation marks in such a case.
Topic: Virginia Woolf made me do it...
Posted: Friday, September 27, 2019 4:53:22 AM
Verbatim wrote:
"The former ambassador from the United States, the woman, was bad news and the people she was dealing with in the Ukraine were bad news so I just want to let you know that."
(My underline of "from", which could be actually "to", perhaps a mistake in the Memorandum.)

No, the woman is the former US ambassador to Ukraine. There was a scandal about her when the chief prosecutor of Ukraine (not the one 'fired' by Biden but his successor) said that she had given him a list of persons that should not be investigated.
Topic: "An Open Letter to My Trump-Supporting Family"
Posted: Monday, September 9, 2019 5:40:13 AM
So the guy had been brainwashed into thinking that his country was the best in the world and then he suddenly discovered that wasn't true. That's a painful realization, but both his country and his family still are what they have been. What has changed is his notion of them. If it's now closer to reality, that's actually good.

What is the objective of his letter? This isn't quite clear to me. Is it just a complaint?

Neither side of this conflict is going to disappear, so they will have to make compromises if they want to live peacefully in one country. Yes, maybe holding their noses, but what is the alternative? If you can't convince your opponents and aren't ready to exterminate them, you have to make concessions.
Topic: Why do people use profanity?
Posted: Tuesday, September 3, 2019 11:40:51 AM
RSoul wrote:
My entire point is that as it took about 4 billion years to go from stromatolites to frozen pizza, so I believe it is a hubris to believe humans can improve on that in less time.

OK. Thank you for your insightful remarks. I have no more questions and think we should let the thread get back on its original track.
Topic: Why do people use profanity?
Posted: Monday, September 2, 2019 11:09:55 PM
RSoul, I still don't understand why those billions of years seem so important to you. Either we understand how our body works, and then we can improve it, or we don't, and then we can't. I don't see any billions of years in this equation. Please explain where you think they are and what role they play.

Suppose you have written a program, and since you did it by randomly changing bits here and there, it took you a billion years. But now that the program works, this very fact means that it is no longer an array of random bits. There is logic in it. If I understand this logic, I will be able to improve the program much faster than you created it because my modifications won't be random.

If you insist on making them randomly for another billion years, I just don't see any sense in that.

Yes, you have a billion year experience that I don't have. But what kind of experience is it? Of changing bits randomly? Why would I need this experience? I don't think I do.
Topic: Why do people use profanity?
Posted: Monday, September 2, 2019 3:40:33 AM
RSoul wrote:
Human nature being what it is.

It will be changed. :) What will come out of it is another matter. But humans have proved already that they can make things never made by nature. Through one of them you and I are now communicating. It's simpler than the human body but still rather complex for a talking monkey. Yet the monkey has managed to build it, as well as many others. And that didn't take billions of years.

RSoul wrote:
Nature has had billions of years of groping and shooting. We’re a part of nature, it’s presumptuous to assume we can improve on it without a few billions of years experience ourselves.

I don't quite understand what we are supposed to do all those billions of years. The human body exists already. Our task is to understand how it works. That's not the same as inventing it from scratch.

RSoul wrote:
Unfortunately the Stapledon archives have disappeared from the internet.

Google still finds his books easily. They must be out of copyright already. I have also found The Seedling Stars, with a bit more effort.

RSoul wrote:
And I found this archive of Galaxy Magazine

Thanks, it looks interesting. The illustrations for Surface Tension gave me an idea what it is about and a vague feeling of familiarity. It may well be that I read it in Russian translation a long time ago.
Topic: Why do people use profanity?
Posted: Sunday, September 1, 2019 12:51:44 AM
RSoul wrote:
However, I believe it is a hubris to believe science can drastically improve the talking monkey. I'm not talking about curative medicine or healing illnesses as these are obviously beneficial. But drastically altering the monkey itself for some adaptive reason sounds like asking for trouble.

The difference between us is that you focus on the current state of science and I look at it in perspective. It will take time and be done step by step, of course, but I just don't see what is going to stop it. The risk of getting into trouble can stop an individual but not the whole humankind. Look at the women trying to improve themselves with plastic surgery. Some of them get into serious trouble but does it stop others? No.

What are they actually trying to do? Adapt to the environment. They can't change the beauty standards, so they try to change themselves.

Now, what would you think about the prospect of your children being less good looking, less healthy, less talented and therefore less successful than their peers because you decided against their genetic improvement? What are they going to feel and think about your decision? I am sure there will be many parents unable to tolerate such a prospect.

That is, I am rather talking not about it being good or bad but about it looking inevitable.

RSoul wrote:
I think it took around four billion years to go from stromatolites to talking monkeys capable of inventing frozen pizza.

Because it was groping around and shooting in all directions. Nature is blind, but we can see. Doesn't this make a difference?

RSoul wrote:
Here's a couple of books you may like.

Thank you. I will look into them.