SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The police chief in Wilmington, North Carolina, has publicly lambasted one of his officers. The officer recently pulled over a local attorney moonlighting as an Uber driver and told the driver that he could not film the traffic stop.
"Taking photographs and videos of people that are in plain sight, including the police, is your legal right," Chief Ralph Evangelous said in a Wednesday statement published on the department's Facebook page. "As a matter of fact, we invite citizens to do so when they believe it is necessary. We believe that public videos help to protect the police as well as our citizens and provide critical information during police and citizen interaction."
The statement concluded: "A copy of this statement will be disseminated to every officer within the Wilmington Police Department."
During the February 26 traffic stop, Jesse Bright began filming Sgt. Kenneth Becker when he and other law enforcement officers approached his car. Sgt. Becker, who appeared to be wearing a VieVu body-worn camera, told Bright that a "new law" forbids citizens from filming encounters with police.
"Turn it off or I'll take you to jail," Becker said.
"For recording you?" Bright retorted. "What is the law?"
The officers were unable to cite him the "new law," as it does not exist.
Source: ArsTechnica
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:15AM (11 children)
What has become of this world if even lawyer need a second job as Uber drivers?
(its not like the demand is low, it's more likely the potential customers cannot pay for the services).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:24AM (6 children)
Easy extra cash for people who don't want a second job.
Unfortunately it's enough to live off, and so people abuse the system by using it for their primary income, and then throw a wobbler when they don't get the benefits of being employees, because they've forgotten they're abusing the system by treating it as if they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:16AM (1 child)
People being able to live is unfortunate? Interesting.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @10:53AM
[Jeremy Irons] You have no idea.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by VLM on Tuesday March 14 2017, @12:22PM
so people abuse the system
Thats like extreme stockholm syndrome. People get that too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:34PM (2 children)
With your poor phrasing I'm left to interpret... "abuse the system" refers to Uber bypassing local taxi laws / regulations? Even if I agree with you that Uber is somehow abusing the system, I still don't see how the drivers are the ones abusing the system. That is just some level of bonkers projection, you dislike Uber (I presume) and pass the buck down to the drivers? I dislike many companies I'm forced to deal with (telecoms looking at YOU) but I do my best to not shove my frustrations on to the employee doing their job.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:48PM (1 child)
Different AC here, but I'm wondering if GP meant instead that the drivers have sort of used Uber's "hey beer money on the side gig" offer and distorted it into a replacement for an actual full time job.
I don't know if the implication is that the drivers are greedy, lazy slobs or whatever who are too lazy to get a real job or something, but I admit that it does irritate me that people would take up Uber's offer of a very much part time gig for beer money and then whinge when it doesn't turn out to be something that pays well as a day job. Personally I tend to then look around at the larger economy and ask myself what would push people into doing this.
Of course, then I look at human nature and all the drama queens I've had the displeasure of working with.
I don't know. It's a mess. Cleanse civilization with nuclear fire and maybe try again in a thousand years or so.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:33PM
Cleanse civilization with nuclear fire and maybe try again in a thousand years or so.
The timescale is more likely something like 100 million years. The coal-and-oil reserves first need to be replenished.
(Score: 3, Funny) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:22AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:33PM
He looks young, probably has a gazillion dollars in student loans and an entry level job.
(Score: 2) by Whoever on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:53PM (1 child)
How do you know that it's a second job? There is a surplus of lawyers in the USA, I believe that it can be difficult to find a job unless you graduate from one of the top law schools.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday March 14 2017, @04:01PM
Also, it should be noted that a lot of lawyers don't actually make boatloads of money. Public defenders are a standard example [chron.com]. (In case you don't want to click the link, it says that median salaries for beginning public defenders in 2010 was $47,500.) And there are other areas of law where it's unusual to earn high salaries. I don't know about the guy in TFA, but it's certainly possible for a lawyer to want some supplementary income, considering how many graduate law school with massive debts.
(Score: 2, Disagree) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:25AM (52 children)
Lawyer Films His Traffic Stop, Even After Cop Says Not to, Citing Made-Up Law
That makes it sound like the lawyer cited a made-up law.
Alsotitlecaseisstupid!
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 3, Insightful) by maxwell demon on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:32AM (8 children)
Yeah, and he filmed how his traffic stops, even after the cop told the traffic not to stop. English is a terribly ambiguous language.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:26AM (7 children)
Lawyer Films His Traffic Stop, Even After Cop, Citing Made-Up Law, Says Not to
Relative clause more proximal to relevant noun => less ambiguity, I'd say zero.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:43PM (5 children)
Yeah, but nitpicky people get grumpy when you end a sentence with a preposition. How about:
Cop Says Not to Film Traffic Stop, Citing Made-Up Law, but Lawyer Does Anyway
Just make the whole thing more directly S-V-O.
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2, Insightful) by darkpixel on Tuesday March 14 2017, @04:14PM (1 child)
Cop Says Not to Film Traffic Stop, Citing Made-Up Law, but Lawyer Does Anyway--you'll never guess what happens next
FTFY
(Score: 1, Redundant) by darnkitten on Tuesday March 14 2017, @04:37PM
...or:
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:16PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:42PM
Yeah, but nitpicky people get grumpy when you end a sentence with a preposition.
A Texan and an Easterner were on a plane together.
The Texan says, "So where ya from?".
The Easterner replies, "I am from a place where we don't end sentences with prepositions".
"Oh, begging your pardon", the Texan says. "Where ya from, asshole?".
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 16 2017, @02:38AM
Who is this Anyway the lawyer is dating and why is police officer Say Not going to film traffic stops?
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:24PM
The ambiguity I mentioned isn't removed by your reordering.
And looking at your replacement, it seems that it's rather the removal of ambiguity that requires bending of the language.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:10AM (41 children)
You're right about the comma, but you think title case is stupid in a title? Really?
I have to disagree with the latter point, friend.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:21AM (17 children)
It is, really. All it does is makes it harder to read. Sometimes also making things ambigous (windows/Windows). Might be nice if you want some click-bait, I guess. Stop brining (half-dead) printing industry practices to Internet.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:33AM (3 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:47AM (1 child)
Which exactly absurdities are you talking about? You wrote many letters but said nothing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:41PM
ur mom
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:29PM
But title case is a half-dead printing industry practice. It doesn't matter if it predates printing originally. It's pointlessness has nothing to do with its origins.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:43AM (6 children)
Support the weakening of their single-word non-trademarked moniker by calling their Graphical OS "Windoze" instead.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:36PM (5 children)
Support the weakening of their single-word non-trademarked moniker by calling their Graphical OS "Windoze" instead.
Or one could not be childish and could talk like a grown-up instead.
And it doesn't matter much how Microsoft wants us to call it "Microsoft Windows." People say Windows, so say Windows.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:01PM (4 children)
Have you not noticed that people also call it "Windoze" - it's in both wiktionary and the Jargon File? It doesn't matter how much you want us to call it "Windows", people say "Windoze", so, using *your own logic*, say "Windoze".
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:16PM (1 child)
I half never herd someone say "Windoze", but I have scene them right it.
Wait, did I say something wrong?
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:32PM
In practice, to, or from, a moron in a hurry, they're indistinguishable, but it's not hard to make the difference clear if so desired.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:48PM (1 child)
Says the person who uses the term "grown-up" rather than "adult".
Grown-up means adult. Not sure what the problem is there.
Have you not noticed that people also call it "Windoze"
I've noticed that some people call it Windoze, and when they do it's childish.
Most people just say Windows.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15 2017, @06:04PM
Hey, I've got an idea! Let's now argue which is better, TRS-80 or C-64!!!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by NotSanguine on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:15AM (3 children)
It is, really. All it does is makes it harder to read. Sometimes also making things ambigous (windows/Windows). Might be nice if you want some click-bait, I guess. Stop brining (half-dead) printing industry practices to Internet.
I'm hoping against hope that you're not an American. But I'm not very sanguine about that (see what I did there?).
All you've done is proclaim to the world that you are poorly educated and have poor command of English language usage.
I'm not sure what a process to make poultry moist has to do with this discussion, but I'm sure you'll explain it to me in great detail, won't you?
I'm not going to post a bunch of links to show you just how misguided you are, but I recommend that you gather information and improve your understanding of English usage. It will stand you in good stead in other areas.
Given that you obviously didn't receive a quality education, I feel pity for you, as that isn't fair.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Funny) by schad on Tuesday March 14 2017, @01:14PM (1 child)
Foods other than poultry -- I assume you are really thinking of turkey here -- can be brined too. It's much easier to use a so-called dry brine, which simply means putting salt on the food some time in advance of cooking it. Uses far less salt, too. In fact, because supermarket turkeys are injected with salt at the factory, you usually don't want to brine turkey.
I don't know what brining has to do with the discussion either, but I find it more interesting than a debate on title case in story headlines. So I approve of your asinine nitpicking over a typo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:21PM
Why, back home Muh Mamma used to brine just about everything. Thinks I'll go soaks muh feets in some brine right now.
(Score: 3, Disagree) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:33PM
I'm hoping against hope that you're not an American.
He might be dyslexic for all you know, or have a faulty keyboard, or be using his phone during a bumpy car ride. It has nothing to do with his point.
There was really no need to be such a dick about it.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:43AM
You've gone and proved the maxim that "it's better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt."
I guess the silver lining is that you've gone and proved the rule. Keep up the good work!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:35PM
Stop brining (half-dead) printing industry practices to Internet.
Why reinvent the wheel? Not seeing the problem here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:11AM (6 children)
What's not-stupid in titlecase, title or not? It's done because it's expected and everyone else does it but is there any other rationale?
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by NotSanguine on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:40AM (5 children)
If you don't like title case, don't use it.
That said, many, if not most, people will judge the value of what you write, at least in part, on how you write it.
Your middle school English teacher should have told you that, and your high school English teachers should have deducted points for work that ignored this important lesson.
Assuming you attended college, your English professor upon seeing poorly written and formatted text should have returned such work to you with a comment similar to "I am returning this otherwise good typing paper to you because someone has printed gibberish all over it and put your name at the top."
Since these things apparently never happened, I assume you're an American. I am too, but fortunately I had the benefit of a halfway decent education.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @01:09PM (1 child)
Wow. Just wow. You just defined circular reasoning and straw man in the same post. I'm going to update encyclopedias so they can refer to you from now on.
So look, I'm questioning whether some established and taught practice (that I'm well aware of and entirely capable of following) makes sense in the first place and you apparently cannot even fathom the concept that it indeed might not as you explain that it's right because it's right and belittle me for being uncivilized/ignorant for who knows what reason, perhaps because I'm supposedly unaware of this almighty great feature of language - a statement which is in direct conflict with my ability of making the post in the first place.
It would be one thing had you just defended the authority but the way you wrote it goes way beyond that. It's as if your education wasn't all about "never question the education," like for some, but rather "we removed the word question from this year's dictionary." (*)
No, I'm not American. I'm one of those smug assholes who use metric system and either-but-not-mixed-endian dates and think that those are better systems because there's a _sensible_ _rationale_ behind them and like to apply similar criteria in other contexts as well. While these might not be the most important questions of mankind how else would you fight against cargo cults in general?
And finally, note that this is not an ad hominem since I don't consider the original argument anymore even the topic but rather your bizarre reply itself - all hail newspaper-case if so be, that's just a detail. Deconstructing the thought process of yours and like-minded people is a much more important matter.
*) Look, I even put the dot inside quotes like the Chicago Manual of Style says. Happy?
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday March 15 2017, @01:26AM
Wow. Just wow. You just defined circular reasoning and straw man in the same post. I'm going to update encyclopedias so they can refer to you from now on.
Yes, I was snarky. Yes, I wasn't very pleasant. But there's neither circular reasoning nor straw men in my post.
Let's review.
I said:
If you don't like title case, don't use it.
Nothing circular about that reasoning. Merely a recognition that you can do whatever you like.
Then, I said:
That said, many, if not most, people will judge the value of what you write, at least in part, on how you write it.
Hmm...I have (and I know many who also act in this fashion) reduced the value I place on writing based upon the quality of the usage and style. In some cases, I've rejected such writing outright.
You may disagree with my premise, but again, but my reasoning isn't circular and not a straw man in sight.
I go on to say that:
Your middle school English teacher should have told you that, and your high school English teachers should have deducted points for work that ignored this important lesson.
Assuming you attended college, your English professor upon seeing poorly written and formatted text should have returned such work to you with a comment similar to "I am returning this otherwise good typing paper to you because someone has printed gibberish all over it and put your name at the top."
Once again, you may disagree with my pedagogical ideas, even though the first and second points are pretty standard practice. The third was just snark. Once again, however, there's no circular reasoning or straw men here, just me stating my thoughts about the teaching of English and being an obnoxious jerk.
Since these things apparently never happened, I assume you're an American. I am too, but fortunately I had the benefit of a halfway decent education.
This is pure nastiness on my part. Mostly because I'm frequently appalled at the poor educational standards and the horrible outcomes associated with them in my home. I find it quite frustrating in fact.
I don't see any circular reasoning there, either. Nor do I see a straw man. If you do, please enlighten me, friend.
========
So look, I'm questioning whether some established and taught practice (that I'm well aware of and entirely capable of following) makes sense in the first place and you apparently cannot even fathom the concept that it indeed might not as you explain that it's right because it's right and belittle me for being uncivilized/ignorant for who knows what reason, perhaps because I'm supposedly unaware of this almighty great feature of language - a statement which is in direct conflict with my ability of making the post in the first place.
As I mentioned (which was, in fact, the main point of my initial reply), if you find title case to be unworthy of your use, don't use it. It's no skin off my nose. Have (or don't) at it.
I will say that title case is useful in a variety of ways. As one of the elements of style is detailed in The Elements of Style [bartleby.com]:
I'll assume that you see what I did there to elucidate my point.
It would be one thing had you just defended the authority but the way you wrote it goes way beyond that. It's as if your education wasn't all about "never question the education," like for some, but rather "we removed the word question from this year's dictionary." (*)
No, I question quite a bit. in this case, I do see the value in title case. That we disagree is of little moment. In fact, this whole discussion is of little moment, and would likely have petered out had I not decided to be snarky and obnoxious. So I guess it's my fault.
No, I'm not American. I'm one of those smug assholes who use metric system and either-but-not-mixed-endian dates and think that those are better systems because there's a _sensible_ _rationale_ behind them and like to apply similar criteria in other contexts as well. While these might not be the most important questions of mankind how else would you fight against cargo cults in general?
I agree that the metric system is much more rational, especially the metric system which, where possible, I try to use to the exclusion of imperial units. The either-but-not-mixed-endian dates date bit is absolutely more sensible, but doesn't convey, in terms of internal consistency, anywhere near the value of the metric system.
And finally, note that this is not an ad hominem since I don't consider the original argument anymore even the topic but rather your bizarre reply itself - all hail newspaper-case if so be, that's just a detail. Deconstructing the thought process of yours and like-minded people is a much more important matter.
Your unfounded assumptions led you to confuse my obnoxious and snarky rant with certain logical fallacies. No fallacies, I was just being a jerk.
I hope that assists you in your quest to "deconstruct" my thought process, friend.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 3, Touché) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:43PM (2 children)
your English professor comma upon seeing poorly written and formatted text comma should have returned such work to you
C-
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Wednesday March 15 2017, @01:32AM (1 child)
I like that!
What makes your comment even more amusing, that's a quote [typepad.com] from an unnamed English professor at Ohio University.
No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Wednesday March 15 2017, @04:42PM
What makes your comment even more amusing [superfluous comma removed] [is that] that's [what?] a quote from an unnamed English professor at Ohio University.
Oh dear. That C- isn't going up any time soon.
I wasn't commenting on the part of your comment you appear to be talking about, so I can't work out what has you so amused.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Tuesday March 14 2017, @11:53AM (13 children)
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Interesting) by gidds on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:23PM (12 children)
Er, sorry, excuse me??? The English were using it for, well, titles, before the USA existed!
No, I wasn't there... :-) But I am in England, and I see lots of title-case text.
Title case is useful: it can identify a title within a sentence without needing additional punctuation.
However, I think its common implementation (following some arcane rules specifying that certain words should not be capitalised) is unnecessarily complex, unhelpful, and stupid. In my experience, it's much simpler and clearer to capitalise every word of a title.
For example: if I mention Mr and Mrs Smith, am I referring to two people, or to one movie? You can't tell. (Whereas Mr And Mrs Smith is unambiguous.) Similarly, is Lark Rise to Candleford a TV series or a route? Is Short-Term Care for Burns a book about treating heat injuries, or one that's been ordered by Homer's boss?
If everyone always capitalised every word of a title, then we wouldn't have that sort of ambiguity, and title case would carry its grammatical weight.
[sig redacted]
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Tuesday March 14 2017, @02:32PM (6 children)
No, I wasn't there... :-) But I am in England, and I see lots of title-case text.
As am I, but the examples you see are imported. You might want to read a style guide written in England. They all recommend against it. Or pick up an older book from before we imported any American typographical conventions and see chapter titles (and even the cover) with initial capitalisation but no title case.
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday March 14 2017, @05:53PM (5 children)
As am I, but the examples you see are imported. You might want to read a style guide written in England. They all recommend against it.
Why is it that the English always want to blame bad habits on "imported Americanisms," when 90% of the time the practices originated in England? This is very common for a lot of usage and grammar issues, where supposed "Americanisms" just reflect the state of English usage from a century ago or whatever. In some cases, certain usage died out (or at least became infrequent) in England, but then has seemed to return to the homeland in recent years. In other cases, the claim for an American origin is wholly false.
Anyhow, here's a brief history of typographical standards for capitalization. The early 18th century was probably the heyday of capitalization. The English vogue for capitalization gradually spread to American presses, which imitated the "motherland." English looked almost like German, with most nouns capitalized. During the late 18th century, this practice gradually decreased, where there were often standard changes: all-caps turned into "title case" (with all nouns and sometimes other words capitalized), title case turned into italic title case or italic sentence case, and the use of italics in general decreased. These changes continued in the 19th century.
If you look at books and newspapers published in England in the 1800s, you'll see all sorts of standards. The use of all-caps in titles and headlines was still quite common (and basically standard). Small caps using "title case" (with larger caps on important words) was also common for headings and subheadings. Mixed case like modern title case was mostly reserved for in-text references to titles of books, etc. (often in italic) but can sometimes be seen for headings.
Anyhow, in the 20th century, these trends toward decreased capitalization continued. All-caps and small-caps use became less frequent, with title case substituted in many cases. Title case remained standard in England for references to actual, well, TITLES (of books, plays, etc.). Headlines in newspapers of the early 20th century were still often in all-caps, but subheadings and lesser headlines shifted to title case (both in the U.S. *and* in England).
For whatever reason, England started dropping title case in headlines somewhere around the mid-20th century. American newspapers frequently retained it. Title case still remained common in England when referencing actual titles of works, though some publishing houses switched to sentence case (initially those who wanted to seem cool and "modern").
Whether modern examples in England of headlines in title case are merely old-fashioned or derived from American style (itself ultimately based on the 17th and 18th-century English vogue for unnecessary capitalization everywhere) is probably an open question. But the idea that title case originated in America is simply nonsense.
Or pick up an older book from before we imported any American typographical conventions and see chapter titles (and even the cover) with initial capitalisation but no title case.
I suggest you might consider looking at books printed before the mid-20th century. Actual book title pages and covers for many presses have consistently been in title case since they switched from the all-caps format common more than a century ago. My sense is that chapter titles and headings shifted more directly in England from all-caps (still common until early 20th century) to sentence case, but I don't claim to know that for certain. I'm speaking mostly of academic and scholarly presses here, which tend to follow more consistent style guides. Trade books make all sorts of random typographical decisions, particularly since the "artistic" use of capitalization spread in the 20th century.
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:39PM (3 children)
Why is it that the English always want to blame bad habits on "imported Americanisms," when 90% of the time the practices originated in England?
No-one's doing that.
The Brits just got round to moving to a better system before the Yanks did. Sound familiar? ;)
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:45PM (1 child)
No-one's doing that.
The post I was responding to said the following about older books:
... before we imported any American typographical conventions...
To me, that implies that title-case originated in America, no?
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:46PM
Oop.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15 2017, @02:24AM
Why is it that the English always want to blame bad habits on "imported Americanisms," when 90% of the time the practices originated in England?
No-one's doing that.
The Brits just got round to moving to a better system before the Yanks did. Sound familiar? ;)
Nope. We got Donald Trump large and in charge and Nigel Farage isn't running things yet.
'murikkka! Fuck yeah!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15 2017, @04:58AM
you know a WOT is going to kick ass when it starts with "Anyhow, here's a brief history of typographical standards for capitalization."
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:41PM
There are better ways to specify titles within text - italics and quotes get used on Wikipedia, albeit in odd ways sometimes. "Classic" episodes of Doctor Who get formatted one way, post-2005 episodes another. No idea why.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:54PM
Gradient background makes it damn easy to identify a title, though. If you want to argue about being usable without styling there are H# HTML elements and SN happens to use them.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @07:42PM (2 children)
If you mention /Mr and Mrs Smith/, you are referring to the movie and resumably, /Lark Rise to Candleford/ is a TV series.
People who like HTML in their posts can, I am led to believe, do the real thing.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by gidds on Wednesday March 15 2017, @12:34PM (1 child)
I use ASCII conventions for /italics/, *bold*, and _underline_ myself.
But it seems a bit redundant to use two separate conventions (italics and capitalisation) to indicate titles! If you're using capitalisation anyway, why not use it fully and remove the need for anything else?
[sig redacted]
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday March 15 2017, @05:08PM
/The Title/ *refers to* the work, using its title. And as the title is title-cased, it too is title-cased when being referred to.
Note also that refering to the title - "The Title" - would not be italicised, as it's not a reference to the work, but a reference to the sequence of words that is the title of the work.
You may need to re-read /Godel Escher Bach/ if the above appears confusing, there's a whole chapter devoted to the difference between things and how you refer to things (including referring to names (that in turn refer to things)) in there, IIRC.
For reference, my company does proofreading for governments, academics (authors and journals), standards bodies, ... . We've seen a hundred different conventions, but in general they overlap an awful lot. (References being the exception, no 2 bodies agree with each other.)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by darnkitten on Tuesday March 14 2017, @04:51PM
Interestingly, the current library standard is to use sentence case for titles when cataloging--I've done that for so long now that typing in title case feels awkward. I now tend to use sentence case for titles in writing, setting out the titles with underlining, italics or quotes, depending on the circumstances.
So (with earlier correction included):
(Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:23PM
It serves absolutely no purpose.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @04:24PM
Huh. I hadn't noticed the weird casing in the titles. I guess that's why I usually feel more inclined to skip it and read the summary instead first.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:35AM (1 child)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15 2017, @05:05AM
oh no, the chief wasn't going to actually do anything about his little piggies he's just going to forward them the memo! way to go you fucking patriot!
(Score: 5, Informative) by fraxinus-tree on Tuesday March 14 2017, @11:30AM (8 children)
Bulgaria here (usually counted in EU, but not always). I didn't get a single traffic stop without a cop making up a law or "rule" trying to scare me in the past 15 years. Everything changed when I put a dashcam - the cop stops me, looks at the windscreen, sees the lens and points me to go, usually before the car is fully stopped. The dashcam is fun, even when it failed and I didn't realize for a month or two. I gave the failed one to a friend and he was amazed what an effect a broken camera has.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Tuesday March 14 2017, @12:28PM (7 children)
The car market has failed in that I get to select among 15 buggy failure "smart car" dashboards that take 10 button presses to make the slightest HVAC change and are extremely expensive and unreliable compared to the manual controls I purchased, yet I can't get a cheap dash cam built in OEM standard equipment from the manufacturer.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by tibman on Tuesday March 14 2017, @01:21PM (2 children)
Might be a blessing. If they did build in dashcams the cams would auto-upload to the cloud "for your convenience" and contain no light indicating if the in-car mic was on or not.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:22PM (1 child)
If they did build in dashcams the cams would auto-upload to the cloud "for your convenience"
I kind of like that idea WRT the cop demanding the flash chip or the entire camera so he can lose it, then the real interrogation begins.
"Sure officer I'll cooperate fully and you can have my camera but its uploaded live streaming to my youtube channel since I pushed that button, so its going to look incredibly suspicious of you in a court of law if anything happens, very premeditated on your part, officer."
People are already used to phone and home mics being live 24x7. Siri, Alexa, google now, all the same.
No recording LED might actually be a feature WRT angry cops. In fact installing a "map reading flashlight red LED" might be tactically useful WRT calming the cop while you're filming him. "Shut it down" "OK officer no problem see the light is off now"
(Score: 2) by fraxinus-tree on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:38PM
We are even better. A lot of modern fleet management systems here include (pretty cheap, it's EU w/ it's near total 3G/4G coverage) video upload feature so the cops are already used to it. Trucks, buses, taxis and a lot of unbranded cars have them installed. Sorry, officer, I cannot delete it and I don't know where the record is kept, but my boss looks sometimes and calls when we do something stupid.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Grishnakh on Tuesday March 14 2017, @03:19PM
The car market hasn't completely failed. Go buy a Mazda; the HVAC is completely separate from the infotainment system, and even on the fully-automatic HVAC system it's regular knobs and buttons and pretty easy to use.
Avoid any cars that require you to use a touchscreen to adjust the HVAC. That's just stupid.
(Score: 3, Funny) by dry on Tuesday March 14 2017, @05:14PM (2 children)
Why would you want to adjust the High Voltage Alternating Current? My old truck just has an ignition switch which enables converting the LVDC to HVDC using a coil.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Wednesday March 15 2017, @02:00PM (1 child)
My old truck
Let me guess, the air conditioner feature is rolling the windows down, right?
(Score: 2) by dry on Thursday March 16 2017, @01:15AM
Sometimes, if the truck has been parked in the Sun you do need to roll the window down for a bit. Why pay for an air conditioner that only gets used a couple of times a year?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday March 14 2017, @06:08PM (3 children)
I'm not sure why this is even surprising. Cops lie to suspects all the time. They have no legal obligation to tell the truth. (While we're at it, they have no legal obligation to protect you if you're in danger. They have no legal obligation to respond to any emergency. Even if they demonstrate gross negligence in responding to a call which puts people in grave danger, they are generally still covered by their "qualified immunity.")
If you are in a compromising situation and ask someone if they are a cop, they can lie and say no. If you tell something to a cop and say it's "just between you and me" and the cop agrees, it can still be used in court against you.
Basically, unless a cop is under oath or in certain other very specific circumstances, they have absolutely no duty to tell the truth -- and in fact are trained to lie through their teeth.
So, while this story is disturbing, it's also basically par for the course in a typical police day. They may more typically lie to suspects under interrogation or something, but I don't find it at all surprising that they'd lie to a random person during a traffic stop to get their way.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Tuesday March 14 2017, @08:59PM
They can't give legal advice but they often do. But I could be wrong, as you know I am not a lawyer.
(Score: 2) by fraxinus-tree on Tuesday March 14 2017, @09:47PM
Here, cops have much less "qualified immunity" than in US and a lot of cases when they have to tell the truth or at least have a damn good reason not to. They lie anyways. They also have a lot of cases when they DO have a legal obligation to protect you when you are in danger. They sometimes do. That's why modern technology is fun. For now.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Wednesday March 15 2017, @03:49PM
Unfortunately, they also have a habit of lying even when they do have a duty to tell the truth, such as on warrant requests or when testifying in court.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 14 2017, @10:39PM (2 children)
Finally, a highly commented article and it's mostly off topic. Moonlighting lawyers and grammar police.
(Score: 2) by Bill Evans on Wednesday March 15 2017, @11:54AM
Do grammar police have a legal obligation to tell the truth?
(Score: 2) by Bot on Thursday March 16 2017, @01:33AM
> Moonlighting lawyers and grammar police.
This phrase would be clearer with a verb IMHO.
Account abandoned.