Does the spell checker catch "fucker"? :rolleyes:

Oh my, shall we bruthas?

fukka
fukker
f*ck
f'uck
f**k


anyone care to add?

I used Microsoft's Keyboard Layout Creator to build a custom "language" in Windows where the "f" keyed an "ƒ" - so I could type ƒuck on AudioGalaxy and avoid the bot.

And there, is the basic difference, I think ...

You (general, not specific, you) laud your board for it's freedom, while pillorying ours for censorship, yet you cannot say a simple word in your land where the grass is greener and all the women are well-endowed.

Fuck. Fucking. Fuckity fuck fuck.

We have entire threads devoted to fuck.

And also to fucking.

and cock . and whale penii

God I love this fucking place!
:love: :love: :love: :love:

and more recently, Dicks.

There were well-endowed women there? Now you tell me.

Okay, well, off to do some pillorying.

Why have some of the words in my post been blanked

Certain words may have been censored by the administrator. If your posts contain any censored words, they will be blanked-out like this: *****.

The same words are censored for all users, and censoring is done by a computer simply searching and replacing words. It is in no way 'intelligent'.

Yes. It's Yiddish.

http://www.bartleby.com/61/86/N0188600.html

Ever consider that every number has an original name, right? "one, two.... two billion, 7 trillion, a google, etc"

And numbers are limitless, without end, right? Even if we can't conceive of that, the numberline goes on FOREVER.

So, since we name the numbers, it must be that every word, sound, phrase, utterance, every single sound in the history of mankind is going to be the name of a number.

But we don't name all the numbers, do we? Just the ones we need to name.

That's pretty much what I was asking. Thanks.

...and yeah, I really had no clue - never even heard of Audio Galaxy. 'til now.

You have it exactly backwards. Not every utterance is the *name* of a number. But every utterance *has* a number...several, actually, depending on what system you use to encode it, and the number has several proper names, usually one per system.

For example, "SteveBsjb" encoded in ASCII has the number 0x5374657665426A7362, which--if Beanshell isn't lying to me--is
1,539,466,998,176,218,248,034 in decimal.
Considered as an utterance it would be close to "steevbisjib". But there are lots of numbers that don't correspond to an utterance in any encoding system you choose. And if strictly encoded as sounds...using .au or .wav formats, for example, there are many sounds that are indistingushable by ear that have very different numbers.

There's more numbers than there are anything else...a good thing, considering it would be inconvenient to run out of integers while counting something else.

But there's more real numbers than integers. Read more on this topic at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleph_number

I had always believed that numbers were an imaginary concept.

Then I read, in Popular Science or Discover or Scientific American, don't remember which, that while researchers were studying patients suffering from localized brain damage in an effort to determine where in the brain certain functions are performed, they found that some stroke patients lose specific math abilities (these functions are subsequently re-learned by other parts of the brain). More interestingly, damage to a specific enough area of the brain can render a patient unable to concieve of certain digits. Further exploration into this phenomenon revealed that we actually have a seperate clump of neurons representing each of the digits in our ten-based number system. That's right, the digits are hard-wired into our brains.