PhotographyREVIEW.com Off-Topic Forum

Anything that's not related to photography, except religion and politics*. Discuss Britney Spears, your Kiss records, swing dancing, salsa recipes. The Off-Topic forum is moderated by walterick and adina.
*Religious and political threads will be deleted
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 78

Thread: Pet Peeves

  1. #51
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denver Colorado Area
    Posts
    2,242

    Re: Pet Peeves

    The argument would go like this:

    Take as a given that Everything is lost.

    Ok then, answer the question. If the premise is true then what isn't lost.

    The answer is nothing.

    Therefore saying that Everything is lost is the opposite of saying there is nothing that has not been lost.

    If you premise that nothing is lost then answer the following question:

    What is not lost? The answer is everything. Saying that everything is not lost is logically EXACTLY the same thing as saying nothing is lost which is not what you meant to say.

    If you premise that SOME things are lost, answer this question:

    What is lost? The answer is SOME things but not everything. So if you want to say that some things have been lost but not everything, you should say not all is lost, because that is what means that not all is lost.

  2. #52
    project forum co-moderator Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    wa state
    Posts
    11,195

    Re: Pet Peeves

    "not" = -1 therefore -1 = "not"

    therefore (all)(-1) = (-1)(all)

    The statements are equal.
    Keep Shooting!

    CHECK OUT THE PHOTO PROJECT FORUM
    http://forums.photographyreview.com/...splay.php?f=34

    Please refrain from editing my photos without asking.

  3. #53
    Snap Happy CaraRose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL, USA
    Posts
    2,474

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by daq7
    The argument would go like this:

    Take as a given that Everything is lost.

    Ok then, answer the question. If the premise is true then what isn't lost.

    The answer is nothing.

    Therefore saying that Everything is lost is the opposite of saying there is nothing that has not been lost.

    If you premise that nothing is lost then answer the following question:

    What is not lost? The answer is everything. Saying that everything is not lost is logically EXACTLY the same thing as saying nothing is lost which is not what you meant to say.

    If you premise that SOME things are lost, answer this question:

    What is lost? The answer is SOME things but not everything. So if you want to say that some things have been lost but not everything, you should say not all is lost, because that is what means that not all is lost.
    That doesn't follow to me. The inverse of everything is not nothing. Let's say we're referring to a small set of five pencils. All the pencils must include all five. To not have all the pencils will include all cases where I have less than five pencils. That means cases for "some" and the case for "none" would both need to be included in the inverse of everything (NOT everything = something OR nothing)
    --Cara

    Canon 60D
    Canon XSi
    Canon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS
    Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS
    Canon 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS
    Canon 100mm 2.8L IS Macro
    Canon 300mm F4 L IS
    Canon 50mm F1.8
    Tokina SD 12-24mm F/4 DX

    My stuff on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35592266@N05

    My photo blog: http://adventureswithnaturephotography.blogspot.com/

  4. #54
    Snap Happy CaraRose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL, USA
    Posts
    2,474

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by Frog
    "not" = -1 therefore -1 = "not"

    therefore (all)(-1) = (-1)(all)

    The statements are equal.
    Agreed.

    I broke it into logical statements.

    everything=A
    lost=B

    !=NOT
    "is" becomes "="

    !A = B [(NOT A) is B]
    A = !B [A is (NOT B)]


    Logically, if !A=B, then it follows that the inverse of !A will equal the inverse of B. Therefore both statements are logically sound.

    Sorry, I hope super nerdy logic folk isn't anyone's pet peeves! I majored in computer science and minored in philosophy. I think this way.
    --Cara

    Canon 60D
    Canon XSi
    Canon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS
    Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS
    Canon 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS
    Canon 100mm 2.8L IS Macro
    Canon 300mm F4 L IS
    Canon 50mm F1.8
    Tokina SD 12-24mm F/4 DX

    My stuff on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35592266@N05

    My photo blog: http://adventureswithnaturephotography.blogspot.com/

  5. #55
    Nature/Wildlife Forum Co-Moderator Loupey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Central Ohio
    Posts
    7,856

    Re: Pet Peeves

    I really dislike it when my son farts at the dinner table.





    Every time.





    As loud as possible.
    Please do not edit or repost my images.

    See my website HERE.


    What's a Loupe for anyway?

  6. #56
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denver Colorado Area
    Posts
    2,242

    Re: Pet Peeves

    not =-1 therefore all = -1? That is a logical and linguistic leap that is absurd.

    Map these statements:

    I have lost everything
    I have lost something
    I have lost nothing

    to

    All is lost
    Not all is lost
    Nothing is lost

    I will admit to some linguistic ambiguity between the statement all is lost and all is not lost. But it is far more accurate verbally to say not all is lost than it is to say all is not lost. The latter is ambiguous and stupid. Of course I am a minority of one. You needn't fret that I feel contempt for this usage. You are quite welcome to feel contempt for me. You will anyway.
    Last edited by daq7; 05-12-2010 at 08:52 PM.

  7. #57
    Snap Happy CaraRose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Chicago, IL, USA
    Posts
    2,474

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by daq7
    not =-1 therefore all = -1? That is a logical and linguistic leap that is absurd.
    Neither me nor Frog said not=-1 therefore all=-1. Frog was using the same principle that say 1(2) is the same as 2(1). (-1)(all) is the same as (all)(-1). Where the negation takes place is irrelevant, since the two values are still equivalent.

    My statement is basically a variation of transposition.

    NOT A = B
    therefore:
    A = NOT B

    Assume NOT A is TRUE.
    NOT A = B, therefore B must be TRUE.
    Since NOT A is TRUE, A must be FALSE.
    Since B is TRUE, NOT B must be FALSE.
    Therefore A = NOT B.

    Using the following definitions for All, None, and Some
    All is the entirety of a set, NOT All would be anything that is not the entirety of the set, this means Not All may be either None OR Some.
    None is nothing of a set, NOT None, is anything that contains anything of the set, whether partial or entire. So NOT None may be Some or All.
    Some is a partial of the set, Not Some would then have to be anything that is not the partial set. So Some may not be None and may not be All. So Some would be NOT(All OR None).

    Since Not All = None OR Some.
    Then All = NOT(None OR SOME).
    Apply De Morgan's Law and get
    All = NOT None AND Not Some.

    All is lost = (NOT None AND Not Some) is lost.
    Not(All is lost)= NOT((NOT None AND Not Some) is lost.)

    Once again use De Morgan's Law and get
    None OR Some is NOT Lost.

    Since All = None OR Some
    Therefore:
    All is NOT Lost.

    This is making me miss college. I loved logic classes.
    I apologize for my utter geekiness.
    --Cara

    Canon 60D
    Canon XSi
    Canon 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 IS
    Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS
    Canon 55-250mm F4-5.6 IS
    Canon 100mm 2.8L IS Macro
    Canon 300mm F4 L IS
    Canon 50mm F1.8
    Tokina SD 12-24mm F/4 DX

    My stuff on Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/35592266@N05

    My photo blog: http://adventureswithnaturephotography.blogspot.com/

  8. #58
    project forum co-moderator Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    wa state
    Posts
    11,195

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Thank you, Cara! I would have had to think enough to get a headache to give such a succinct answer.
    Keep Shooting!

    CHECK OUT THE PHOTO PROJECT FORUM
    http://forums.photographyreview.com/...splay.php?f=34

    Please refrain from editing my photos without asking.

  9. #59
    project forum co-moderator Frog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    wa state
    Posts
    11,195

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Loupey, thanks for bringing us back to earth.
    Keep Shooting!

    CHECK OUT THE PHOTO PROJECT FORUM
    http://forums.photographyreview.com/...splay.php?f=34

    Please refrain from editing my photos without asking.

  10. #60
    Senior Member billy320's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mahopac, NY USA
    Posts
    517

    Re: Pet Peeves

    I hate long lines, at the store or anywhere

  11. #61
    Liz
    Liz is offline
    Moderator Emeritus Liz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    5,982

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Shopping at Walmart - and the sales person can't speak any English - or understand it. This happened to me more than once.

    I think it's fine that sales persons - or persons in any type of human relation jobs can speak other languages, especially Spanish. But IMO the sales persons should really know how to speak English.

    Liz

  12. #62
    GB1
    GB1 is offline
    Moderator GB1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    San Diego CA
    Posts
    9,960

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by Liz
    Shopping at Walmart - and the sales person can't speak any English - or understand it. This happened to me more than once.

    I think it's fine that sales persons - or persons in any type of human relation jobs can speak other languages, especially Spanish. But IMO the sales persons should really know how to speak English.

    Liz

    A related issue I have here is with foreign help-line personnel, especially from India where their English is probably the hardest of any to understand.

    Speaking of which, I just had a credit card fraud issue where someone was using my card to buy products from Apple's Musicstore ($711 worth, to be exact). They suspended the card and I had to go over recent charges on the telephone with an Indian woman. Whew that was painful.. there were times when I just had to tell here "I can't understand what you just said", as embarrassing as that may sound. I also plainly pointed out to her one charge that was legitimate and I thought she got that -- alas, when I got the paperwork, they denied that one too. I think it shows that her English wasn't good enough to do the job.. guess it doesn't matter to Chase.
    Photography Software and Post Processing Forum Moderator. Visit here!

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Feel free to edit and repost my photos as part of your critique.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    My Site

  13. #63
    Senior Member OldClicker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Mundelein, IL USA
    Posts
    4,075

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by GB1
    A related issue I have here is with foreign help-line personnel, especially from India where their English is probably the hardest of any to understand.

    Speaking of which, I just had a credit card fraud issue where someone was using my card to buy products from Apple's Musicstore ($711 worth, to be exact). They suspended the card and I had to go over recent charges on the telephone with an Indian woman. Whew that was painful.. there were times when I just had to tell here "I can't understand what you just said", as embarrassing as that may sound. I also plainly pointed out to her one charge that was legitimate and I thought she got that -- alas, when I got the paperwork, they denied that one too. I think it shows that her English wasn't good enough to do the job.. guess it doesn't matter to Chase.
    I like when the barely obviously Indian answers the call with something like, "Hello, my name is Shawn O'Reilly. How may I help you?" - TF
    -----------------
    I am no better than you. I critique to teach myself to see.
    -----------------
    Feel free to edit my photos or do anything else that will help me learn.
    -----------------
    Sony/Minolta - way more gear than talent.

  14. #64
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Posts
    1,094

    Re: Pet Peeves

    I have a few:

    People talking on cell phones while doing something else; driving, handing money to a cashier, trying to order something from a clerk, etc. It's really, really rude. Hang up and talk to the person taking your money as if they are a human being, please.

    Hearing "dethaw" makes me crazy. You probably mean "defrost." Dethaw is most likely the opposite of what you mean.

    oh, there are more.
    Erik Williams

    Olympus E3, E510
    12-60 SWD, 50-200 SWD, 50 f/2 macro, EX25, FL36's and an FL50r.

  15. #65
    Senior Member OldClicker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Mundelein, IL USA
    Posts
    4,075

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by Sushigaijin
    I have a few:

    People talking on cell phones while doing something else; driving, handing money to a cashier, trying to order something from a clerk, etc. It's really, really rude. Hang up and talk to the person taking your money as if they are a human being, please.

    Hearing "dethaw" makes me crazy. You probably mean "defrost." Dethaw is most likely the opposite of what you mean.

    oh, there are more.
    I think we shoudn't count cell phones in this thread - just too easy. There is very little about the way that they are used that wouldn't be on my list. - TF
    -----------------
    I am no better than you. I critique to teach myself to see.
    -----------------
    Feel free to edit my photos or do anything else that will help me learn.
    -----------------
    Sony/Minolta - way more gear than talent.

  16. #66
    Panarus biarmicus Moderator (Sports) SmartWombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,750

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Cell phones and driving- should be illegal.
    TEXT messaging and driving - should be illegal.

    I'm astonished that they can't be prosecuted for not driving with due care and attention or something, it shouldn't need a new law to encourage people not to be stupid.
    PAul

    Scroll down to the Sports Forum and post your sports pictures !

  17. #67
    GB1
    GB1 is offline
    Moderator GB1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    San Diego CA
    Posts
    9,960

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by SmartWombat
    Cell phones and driving- should be illegal.
    TEXT messaging and driving - should be illegal.

    I'm astonished that they can't be prosecuted for not driving with due care and attention or something, it shouldn't need a new law to encourage people not to be stupid.
    Yep. It's now illegal here in California. You are still allowed to use hands-free devices though: bluetooth, etc. I still see people sneaking a call in, but it's nowhere near as crazy as it was.
    Photography Software and Post Processing Forum Moderator. Visit here!

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Feel free to edit and repost my photos as part of your critique.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    My Site

  18. #68
    Panarus biarmicus Moderator (Sports) SmartWombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,750

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Hands free is no more distracting than talking to your passenger.
    Less, usually, as I see many drivers turning to talk to their passenger and not watching the road.
    I don't see many on hands free turning to face the direction of their caller ;)
    PAul

    Scroll down to the Sports Forum and post your sports pictures !

  19. #69
    Senior Member OldClicker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Mundelein, IL USA
    Posts
    4,075

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by GB1
    Yep. It's now illegal here in California. You are still allowed to use hands-free devices though: bluetooth, etc. I still see people sneaking a call in, but it's nowhere near as crazy as it was.
    I think the 'hands free allowed' laws are even worse because it lets people believe that this is somehow safe. It's not a matter of where your hands are, it's whare your mind is. Pay attention! - TF
    -----------------
    I am no better than you. I critique to teach myself to see.
    -----------------
    Feel free to edit my photos or do anything else that will help me learn.
    -----------------
    Sony/Minolta - way more gear than talent.

  20. #70
    Senior Member LightBright's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    L.A California
    Posts
    534

    Re: Pet Peeves

    I still see a lot of drivers in california talking on there cell phones (mainly in L.A) while driving. The only time those people will ever be sorry is if they accidentally kill someone. By then it would have been to late!
    -
    Please do not take my photo's. Thank you
    www.SammySoliman.Smugmug.com

  21. #71
    Senior Member OldClicker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Mundelein, IL USA
    Posts
    4,075

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBright
    I still see a lot of drivers in california talking on there cell phones (mainly in L.A) while driving. The only time those people will ever be sorry is if they accidentally kill someone. By then it would have been to late!
    They will still only be sorry that they got caught. Also, I wouldn't call something so easily preventable an accident. - TF
    -----------------
    I am no better than you. I critique to teach myself to see.
    -----------------
    Feel free to edit my photos or do anything else that will help me learn.
    -----------------
    Sony/Minolta - way more gear than talent.

  22. #72
    drg
    drg is offline
    la recherche de trolls drg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Route 66
    Posts
    3,404

    Re: Pet Peeves

    All the 'mitigation' going on right now. Too many people have latched on to phrases and wording that includes mitigate, mitigation, and mitigating.

    They need a paradigm shift.
    CDPrice 'drg'
    Biography and Contributor's Page


    Please do not edit and repost any of my photographs.






  23. #73
    Computer Support Tech MNRyan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Pipestone, MN USA
    Posts
    119

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Stereotypes drive me insane (ie Computer repairmen are geeks and rude, young people are lazy and inconsiderate) I guess these are the ones that would pertain to me and that I find obnoxious, but there are many out there. :mad5:
    Feel free to edit my images, just let me know what you did.

    Nikon D90 w/18-105 VR, 70-300VR, 35mm f1.8G &Tamron 10-24 f3.5-4.5
    Nikon SB-600 Speedlight (x2) w/ Gary Fong 1/2 Cloud Light Sphere (x2) and 1 Cloud
    Slik Pro 700DX tripod w/Vanguard SBH-200 ball-head
    Panasonic ZS8

    My photo's:
    http://s1227.photobucket.com/albums/...20Photography/

  24. #74
    Junior Member Shanxix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Bangalore, Karnataka, India
    Posts
    27

    Re: Pet Peeves

    The latest peeve on this forum seems to be this bvaa individual who has spammed most threads if not all.
    Shankar Subramanian

    myphotojourney-shanxix.blogspot.com

  25. #75
    Ken ksbryan0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Delphia, MT USA
    Posts
    1,160

    Re: Pet Peeves

    Shanxix, you beat me to it! Regular email spam is bad enough, but garbage like bvaa is up to drives me nuts.
    Ken

    My Website: His Creation
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take." Wayne Gretzky

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •