Slashdot Mirror

One wonders why these literal rocket scientists didn't just get a software programmable Linux or PalmOS based wrist-computer and hack together a Mars-time display application into it?"

To bash an old quote:
Its the total geek factor stupid

It the difference between geek and UBER geek. Making a program or something else that is dependant on another device is too easy and while it does rate a little on the geek factor scale, its no where near the geek factor in a dedicated device.

Look at the binary clock, yea sure it could be done using an interface like java, dedicated device is WAAAAAY Cooler, and you don't have to switch screens to use it.

What's with the current boo-hoo over blacklists? Do we have some kind of spammer astroturf going here?

Not certain but this sounds like someone somewhere is completely off the mark. Why would Verio block all traffic, including http, from Noos? Which set of IP's was blocklisted? I thought most anti-spam blocklists only affected receipt of smtp packets? I look up IP's for noos.com's mail exchangers and nothing listed. It'd take too long to go searching for all of noos.com's cablemodem IP space and see if it's been blocklisted, and if it has, the most likely reason is the typical listing of DHCP-delegated address space that's happening to cablemodem pools all over the world.

I don't get it, this is so unlike the typical case of innocent trapped in an anti-spam blocklist that I can't sort out what exactly happened here. If Verio decides they don't want traffic from a French ISP, it's their right. As usual, thank the spammers.

If anyone out there actually believes that the laws of physics as science currently see them are real, they are living in a very strange world. Miracles happen daily, people can levitate, see auras and teleport telepathically.

I am reminded of the subatomic particle the anomalon, whose properties vary from lab to lab, and the neutrino which has mass in the Soviet Union but not in the United States.

I must recommend the excellent book The Holographic Universe - by Michael Talbot - for those people that still think this high tech Physics is anything more than a few people's fantasies.

Unfortunately, until we have conclusive evidence one way or the other

On the evolution front, I'm curious as to what would be considered "conclusive evidence"? It seems to me that anti-evolution forces have skewed our definition of that to serve their own ends.

1. Evolution is different than natural selection. We see evolution all around us as a result of livestock husbandry. That is not natural selection however (unless we consider a farmer a force of nature...) Evolution is demonstrable, repeatable and falsifiable and is demonstrated every damn day.

2. Natural selection is pretty much conclusively proved. Fossil records, genetic diversity between populations of the same species yatta yatta. It's massively documented. The "missing link" argument of creationists is specious (no pun intended) at best. There will always be a missing link. The missing link in the set {1,2,3} is 2.5... in {1,2,2.5,3} it's 2.75... ad infinitum. There is more evidence for natural selection than there is for black holes...

3. The bible makes a lot of claims about the natural world that are patently false. I would gladly let creationists teach in classrooms if they can show my an insect that has four feet (Leviticus 11:22-23).

Ultimately, if you have enough faith you can believe anything you want... it just doesn't necessarily make it true. If you're really doing the "working through" thing, I would suggest Sagan's Demon Haunted Wordl and, of course, the bible... although I'd keep a copy of Isaac Asimov's Guide to the Bible handy while reading it.

Harvard entomologist James Wilson wrote in the late l970?s that no species, including the human one, has any real purpose beyond the imperatives created by its particular genetic history.

Who the hell is James Wilson? I'm pretty sure you mean E. O. Wilson, author of Sociobiology. And that's such a misleading and inaccurate summary of his thesis, I won't even go into it.

In response, I would say that a mechanistic understanding of human behavior is no barrier towards the search for enlightenment. Knowing what kind of animal you are is the first step to not whistling when you're pissing. Don't think with two minds when one is enough.

--
The scalloped tatters of the King in Yellow must cover
Yhtill forever. (R. W. Chambers, the King in Yellow)

I was going to give a detailed reply, but why re-write what someone already has said?

From Einstein on God;

I think part of the problem of theists wanting to believe that famous scientists such as Einstein and Hawking (for Stephen Hawking's view on a 'first cause' see this link) believe in their god comes from the common quote: "God does not play dice with the Universe." To those who already wish that Einstein believed in god, Einstein's mere mention of "god" here is all the "assurancance" they need. But to truly understand what he meant when he said that, one has to dig further into Einstein's views toward god(s) and religion. Scientists often informally use "god" to mean the laws of nature.

In a (non-religious) discussion w/ another xian, I brought up this quote: "Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper." Einstein: The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, Page 422.

The person's immediate reaction was to say, "yeah, but WHO is the piper???" (Sigh) I don't think these kinds of people are really interested in the true meaning of these quotes, only what parts of them they can use to bolster their cause.

Here are some quotes I found relating to Einstein's views on god & religion:

"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings." Upon being asked if he believed in God by Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, April 24, 1921, Einstein: The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, Page 502.

The rest of the article includes additional references. If interested, click on the link; Einstein on God.

I was going to give a detailed reply, but why re-write what someone already has said?

From Einstein on God;

I think part of the problem of theists wanting to believe that famous scientists such as Einstein and Hawking (for Stephen Hawking's view on a 'first cause' see this link) believe in their god comes from the common quote: "God does not play dice with the Universe." To those who already wish that Einstein believed in god, Einstein's mere mention of "god" here is all the "assurancance" they need. But to truly understand what he meant when he said that, one has to dig further into Einstein's views toward god(s) and religion. Scientists often informally use "god" to mean the laws of nature.

In a (non-religious) discussion w/ another xian, I brought up this quote: "Everything is determined, the beginning as well as the end, by forces over which we have no control. It is determined for the insect as well as for the star. Human beings, vegetables, or cosmic dust, we all dance to a mysterious tune, intoned in the distance by an invisible piper." Einstein: The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, Page 422.

The person's immediate reaction was to say, "yeah, but WHO is the piper???" (Sigh) I don't think these kinds of people are really interested in the true meaning of these quotes, only what parts of them they can use to bolster their cause.

Here are some quotes I found relating to Einstein's views on god & religion:

"I believe in Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings." Upon being asked if he believed in God by Rabbi Herbert Goldstein of the Institutional Synagogue, New York, April 24, 1921, Einstein: The Life and Times, Ronald W. Clark, Page 502.

The rest of the article includes additional references. If interested, click on the link; Einstein on God.