You are comparing software bought at a store that was written expressly for Windows to somehow being a merit of Windows? That has nothing to do with comparing Ubuntu vs Vista. Compare the two OS's themselves. Besides, screw "sudo apt-get". Menu->Add/Remove Software->Search "photo"->Click button next to Gimp->Click "Apply"->installed.
You forgot to mention that he also paid $99 bucks for Elements. How much did that GIMP install cost?
This basically provides governments with a large bank of DNA they can strong-arm their way into whenever they feel the need, regardless of whatever "privacy statement" the company itself claims to adhere to.
Right... but then you said:
If privacy and your DNA being mapped are important, consider a private laboratory.
*adjusts tinfoil hat*
Wouldn't a "private lab" be just as susceptible to government pressure/warrants?
I've said for years that there should be a standard body for establishing credentials for computer technicians that includes proof of skills and semi-annual retesting to ensure skills development matches the pace of the industry and that a standardized set of fees should be established by this body to be charged by its members.
I've mentioned this guy before; he had graduated from a local technical school and was even a card-carrying A+ tech. As this school had the reputation of "pay to pass", I decided to test him, and pointing at an open box, asked him to point at the motherboard.
He pointed at the case. I repeated the question, wording it differently.
He pointed back at the case.
Standards organizations only work when they're not cash-oriented, and there's always some unscrupulous ninny willing to trade cash for sheepskins...
To me, it always seemed like a no-brainer. I keep a webmail account for all personal communication, and don't give it to work clients. The only people outside work that have my work email address are my immediate family...
Otherwise, I get clients trying to get me to do work on the side after-hours, and I have to explain Uncle Bubba's "Illustrated Ode to Hooters" email to my boss...
Do the radio stations believe that digital music increases or decreases their listenership? How much radio programming is actually based on the artists the big labels sell?
The answers to both those questions depend on whether a radio station is owned by Clear Channel or another media conglomerate...
So why include the phrase "planned use" in this bill? That smacks of thought-crime; in fact, talking about hitting someone in the face with a cream pie would qualify, if you're doing it in protest.
Unless you consider committee meetings to be abusive (I know I do sometimes), there is zero potential for abuse in this bill.
....other than an unpopular organization being labeled as "terroristic", or a "terror threat"? Once you have the label, a lot of other US laws kick in, basically keeping anyone from doing business with you.
All they need is an easy way to apply the label...which they've just facilitated.
It's impossible for such "evidence" to exist, just think about it for a moment.
Thanks for walking right into that. You're so convinced you're right, you sound like the Sicilian from the Princess Bride: "Inconceivable!!!"...and it's funny, 'cause you dodged the question, like most do. I'd ask again, but would you avoid the question again?
You clearly are lacking the ability of imagination to conceive of something beyond your own finite, linear nature.
I'm not the one telling you you're wrong. I'm the one asking you to consider the possibility...
...and per you, it's beyond you.
I really hope it is for lack of trying on your part and not because your brain is insufficient for the task.
Doesn't appear to be my imagination that's having trouble considering something I might not agree with... but nice snark! It ties in well to my earlier posts!
So you'll admit that atheists are superior to yourself because most of us can find a drive for self-improvement without feeling threatened into doing so by an imaginary friend or some fraudster in a nightgown and funny hat?
"superior"? I'm amused! That does seem to be an attitude I've noticed among MOST of your ilk. Once again, if you believe that spiritual beliefs can only fall into one of those two categories, you've not taken the time to engage in actual thought and research on the topic... and if you can't possibly think of any permutations, then "superior" might not be the word I choose.
Really, statements like yours show an amazing lack of character, moral or otherwise.
Translation: Meaning statements you don't agree with... which says what for YOUR character?
Believing in something without evidence, or even the possibility of such evidence, is extremely fanatical.
...but not nearly as dangerous as being convinced you're right. I'm not saying you don't have the right to your beliefs. I am saying that you've no more right to force secular beliefs on others any more than they should foist theirs on you. You seem to think you have that right, though, and you said it earlier. If you choose to have a superiority complex, fine. The rest of us will pat you on the head and continue considering the views of others.
So let me be the first to say it to you, assuming that no one has before, that you are in fact a fanatic of the highest order and the only difference between you and someone who blows themselves up believing that they will get 72 virgins is that you have not yet blown yourself up. And before you try to whine that I'm just calling names why don't you take the time to "prove" that you aren't, since proving negatives is such an important thing to you.
...
Remind me to pick up a can of Snark 'B' Gone later.
Fine. You want proof? Try this: I'm a healthy, hetero male who knows damn well that training *one* virgin is a pain in the hindside. 72 would be ridiculous. No prize, so no incentive, so no explosion. NEXT!
No one here, is interested in actually discussing the real merits or drawbacks of this bill.
Actually, I'd already submitted this for discussion back on the *2nd*, 'cause I'd noticed some provisions in the bill that are a little vague... Read the passage I quoted there for an example.
FUD aside, it has more potential for abuse than the DMCA, and that's saying something...
Which is progress, invalid theories are discarded. Faith would be if he had held the belief despite evidence proving him wrong.
That being my point: He DID, for years. T'weren't 'til HE decided that he MIGHT be wrong that he took another approach...
Again, we do things to the best of our knowledge and if we learn new facts we stop doing things we might have done before. That is not a bad thing, sometimes we have to act with limited knowledge because we can't just sit idly until we have all the facts together but if we fail to adjust our plan once the facts become known we are just thickheaded.
Agreed, which is why I'm happy to discuss this. I'm questioning what many call "fact"; that a deity does NOT exist. I say it's quite *possible* that one does...
NOT because the Bible told me this.
NOT because the clergy "enlightened me."
Not 'cause I choose not to consider it/believe blindly.
Many here that would argue the above; after all, religion is supposed to be "Brainwashing 101." Sure, it CAN be... if you don't think about the answers you're given. But if you can lay out a scenario in which a deity CAN exist, even one scenario, then you HAVE to consider the possibility, no matter how improbable.
The problem with that claim is that it's unsubstantiated. You're faking knowledge where there is none.
My point exactly. Many here have told me, in no uncertain terms, that such a higher power does not and CAN not exist.
I'm STILL waiting for the proof of that.
Sometimes this is so strong that even once the unknown becomes known through new evidence the person will still cling to his beliefs.
...and the same could apply to my point as well. If an agnostic/atheist had proof of a deity in front of them, how many would change their mind?
I cannot prove or disprove your beliefs but I can prove that they are useless, if they had a use that use could be shown or fail to be shown which would support or disprove your claim.
As *I* have a use for them, it's curious that you'd define them as useless. They've worked quite well over the years, and contrary to popular agnostic belief, have aided in positive growth over the years. While I'm far from perfect, the drive for self-improvement stems in part FROM those beliefs.
Note, people.... I may not necessarily follow "standard" Christian thinking as far as the birth of the universe. Don't lump me in with fanatics, and I'll try my hardest to avoid the same. Thanks for the discussion!
...and I'll do the same when someone presents solid proof. Heck, most people won't even TOUCH Kant and the ones that do wave it off with a "well, since his theory seems to have no solution, we'll ignore it."
I'm not saying I have PROOF a God exists. {refer to Douglas Adams joke here, about the babelfish..} I'm saying that NO one, for all the insults, has a verifiable proof AGAINST It/Him/Her... and for something as obvious as they say this is, they should by NOW.
That could also make one wonder about the possibility of a hidden agenda behind the decline of education for common (read: not-rich/powerful people or their families) people.
Looking at the current crop of rich kids, I'd be willing to submit that the rich are suffering more from an educational lack than the rest of us...
I swear, when I heard "What's a well for?" I almost sprayed Dr. Pepper all over the TV.
No because it's a theory founded on evidence we have seen rather than just wild guessing.
...which would explain why Hawking had to recant a 30-year-old theory...
I'm not denying that it's guessing within a more structured framework... but honestly...
While they may have medical uses now, leeches were "state of the art" when they were used. Doctors were convinced of the science behind them... and killed one of our Founding Fathers in doing so. It's all science, right?
look for a simple (or as simple as you can make it) explanation that fits the evidence and see if that explanation has evidence contradicting it.
...which is what I'm asking for... If I happen to believe that a Master Engineer started the whole shebang off, fine. I'm asking for evidence otherwise.
This is where the name-calling usually starts... "Stupid creationist. You're deluding yourself."
Fine. Prove your point and show your evidence.... but if you simply can NOT do it without being insulting, you might not have that valid a point to begin with...
Feel free to explain exactly which creation theory you subscribe to, and let's see how complete it is. Beginning to end, leaving nothing to "well, it just happens that way, and we're not sure why."
Really.
You'll find that you take just as much on faith as I do; you're just more pissy when people disagree. Ye gads, man, just the trust you have in your five senses alone is astounding. Ask someone who's tried LSD for details.
I'm not saying you're wrong in your belief; I'm saying that it's still up in the air... so save the tired spiel for someone who chooses not to consider the damn near infinite possibilities the universe has to offer.
When "spiritual beliefs" stop being complete and total garbage I'm sure we'll all "happily" go along with that.
That's your OPINION. If you have undeniable proof otherwise, feel free to present it. Many of the spiritual ilk believe your opinions are garbage as well...but once again, that's all it is: an opinion.
Too bad for all of you "spiritual belief" is nothing but moronic delusion.
Slamming my belief set without presenting evidence to the contrary isn't very scientific, Spanky...
This is what drives me nuts about fanatics on both sides of this coin: they're convinced that they somehow MUST have the key to life that the rest of us "are missing..", tend towards the snide side, and resort to name-calling when "you don't get it..."
FSM doesn't serve to slam spiritual beliefs, only religious fanaticism and intolerance.
In its pure form, I agree. It serves as a common reference point for those who're uncomfortable with using the term "God/Allah/{pick your fave}". However, not many posts after the OP talked about the FSM, we find:
Or, to put it more bluntly, a sick joke
Does someone calling you a sick joke make for neutral comment?
Actually, according to the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, creationists are a fruit of FSM's bizzare sense of humor. Or, to put it more bluntly, a sick joke
...and here someone pointed out earlier that the whole point of the FSM was not to be insulting...
Tell ya what. I'll happily buy that when the FSM can be used in a discussion thread WITHOUT someone slamming the spiritual beliefs of others.
Note: I did not use the word "religion". Big difference 'tween being religious and bein' spiritual.
As for the CR violation? Take 'em to court jus' like anyone else. Get a C&D order. This isn't news... unless you were LOOKING for a flame-fest 'tween two opposing sides.
cops are people with families at home, are you going to be the one to tell a police officers wife her husband has hepititis contracted from a bite while restraining a suspect, when a simple taser would have doen the job and kept everyone safe. Because that's the kind of shit that happens.
That, and worse. However, you're missing a very big point:
The police are not a conscripted force.
They deal with murderers, rapists, and worse.... by choice. I can appreciate that choice and their efforts... but it doesn't change the fact that they chose to apply for that job. As with ANY person in uniform, on the public dole, the police are supposed to work under our terms, not whichever ethical mindset they wake up with that day. At the end of the day, the police chief reports to a civilian. That civvie {usually the mayor, or sometimes a council} calls the shots.
Yes, Virginia, the police are accountable for unprofessional behavior just as the rest of us are...
...and you've never seen the Autobahn at its best. No speed limit, and it WORKS. Why? Drivers who want to KEEP that lack of a speed limit driving at high rates in a usually logical manner.
Does the "Avarage Joe" actually install a new Operating system on his old xp box?
Not typically, though it DOES happen. In fact, in the first month after XP debuted, we had around 8 clients that ran out, bought it, and tried to install it, totally ignoring the sysreqs. The guy with the 486 stands out. As for Vista "upgrade" installs, I've only seen two of that type; most people I've talked to want nothing to do with Vista, citing the negative buzz.
I did not install it on my 4 year old machine, but it runs just fine one the new machine I just bought.
I see....and on this new machine you JUST bought, what does Vista say the Windows Experience Rating is?
all the software I ran on the old box runs better/much better on the vista box.
App list, please, and while you're at it, could you more accurately define "better/much better"? I'm asking for curiosity; I've seen info to the contrary.
Slashdot Mirror
You forgot to mention that he also paid $99 bucks for Elements. How much did that GIMP install cost?
Only idiots deal in absolutes. ;)
Right... but then you said:
If privacy and your DNA being mapped are important, consider a private laboratory. *adjusts tinfoil hat*Wouldn't a "private lab" be just as susceptible to government pressure/warrants?
You mean something like CompTIA?
I've mentioned this guy before; he had graduated from a local technical school and was even a card-carrying A+ tech. As this school had the reputation of "pay to pass", I decided to test him, and pointing at an open box, asked him to point at the motherboard.
He pointed at the case. I repeated the question, wording it differently.
He pointed back at the case.
Standards organizations only work when they're not cash-oriented, and there's always some unscrupulous ninny willing to trade cash for sheepskins...
Yo!
To me, it always seemed like a no-brainer. I keep a webmail account for all personal communication, and don't give it to work clients. The only people outside work that have my work email address are my immediate family...
Otherwise, I get clients trying to get me to do work on the side after-hours, and I have to explain Uncle Bubba's "Illustrated Ode to Hooters" email to my boss...
No thanks!
The answers to both those questions depend on whether a radio station is owned by Clear Channel or another media conglomerate...
Does this mean Weird Al will be banned from performing in Canada?
So why include the phrase "planned use" in this bill? That smacks of thought-crime; in fact, talking about hitting someone in the face with a cream pie would qualify, if you're doing it in protest.
....other than an unpopular organization being labeled as "terroristic", or a "terror threat"? Once you have the label, a lot of other US laws kick in, basically keeping anyone from doing business with you.
All they need is an easy way to apply the label...which they've just facilitated.
Thanks for walking right into that. You're so convinced you're right, you sound like the Sicilian from the Princess Bride: "Inconceivable!!!" ...and it's funny, 'cause you dodged the question, like most do. I'd ask again, but would you avoid the question again?
You clearly are lacking the ability of imagination to conceive of something beyond your own finite, linear nature.I'm not the one telling you you're wrong. I'm the one asking you to consider the possibility...
...and per you, it's beyond you.
I really hope it is for lack of trying on your part and not because your brain is insufficient for the task.Doesn't appear to be my imagination that's having trouble considering something I might not agree with... but nice snark! It ties in well to my earlier posts!
So you'll admit that atheists are superior to yourself because most of us can find a drive for self-improvement without feeling threatened into doing so by an imaginary friend or some fraudster in a nightgown and funny hat?"superior"? I'm amused! That does seem to be an attitude I've noticed among MOST of your ilk. Once again, if you believe that spiritual beliefs can only fall into one of those two categories, you've not taken the time to engage in actual thought and research on the topic... and if you can't possibly think of any permutations, then "superior" might not be the word I choose.
Really, statements like yours show an amazing lack of character, moral or otherwise.Translation: Meaning statements you don't agree with... which says what for YOUR character?
Believing in something without evidence, or even the possibility of such evidence, is extremely fanatical....but not nearly as dangerous as being convinced you're right. I'm not saying you don't have the right to your beliefs. I am saying that you've no more right to force secular beliefs on others any more than they should foist theirs on you. You seem to think you have that right, though, and you said it earlier. If you choose to have a superiority complex, fine. The rest of us will pat you on the head and continue considering the views of others.
So let me be the first to say it to you, assuming that no one has before, that you are in fact a fanatic of the highest order and the only difference between you and someone who blows themselves up believing that they will get 72 virgins is that you have not yet blown yourself up. And before you try to whine that I'm just calling names why don't you take the time to "prove" that you aren't, since proving negatives is such an important thing to you....
Remind me to pick up a can of Snark 'B' Gone later.
Fine. You want proof? Try this: I'm a healthy, hetero male who knows damn well that training *one* virgin is a pain in the hindside. 72 would be ridiculous. No prize, so no incentive, so no explosion. NEXT!
..and have a great day!
Actually, I'd already submitted this for discussion back on the *2nd*, 'cause I'd noticed some provisions in the bill that are a little vague... Read the passage I quoted there for an example.
FUD aside, it has more potential for abuse than the DMCA, and that's saying something...
That being my point: He DID, for years. T'weren't 'til HE decided that he MIGHT be wrong that he took another approach...
Again, we do things to the best of our knowledge and if we learn new facts we stop doing things we might have done before. That is not a bad thing, sometimes we have to act with limited knowledge because we can't just sit idly until we have all the facts together but if we fail to adjust our plan once the facts become known we are just thickheaded.Agreed, which is why I'm happy to discuss this. I'm questioning what many call "fact"; that a deity does NOT exist. I say it's quite *possible* that one does...
NOT because the Bible told me this.
NOT because the clergy "enlightened me."
Not 'cause I choose not to consider it/believe blindly.
Many here that would argue the above; after all, religion is supposed to be "Brainwashing 101." Sure, it CAN be... if you don't think about the answers you're given. But if you can lay out a scenario in which a deity CAN exist, even one scenario, then you HAVE to consider the possibility, no matter how improbable.
The problem with that claim is that it's unsubstantiated. You're faking knowledge where there is none.My point exactly. Many here have told me, in no uncertain terms, that such a higher power does not and CAN not exist.
I'm STILL waiting for the proof of that.
Sometimes this is so strong that even once the unknown becomes known through new evidence the person will still cling to his beliefs....and the same could apply to my point as well. If an agnostic/atheist had proof of a deity in front of them, how many would change their mind?
I cannot prove or disprove your beliefs but I can prove that they are useless, if they had a use that use could be shown or fail to be shown which would support or disprove your claim.As *I* have a use for them, it's curious that you'd define them as useless. They've worked quite well over the years, and contrary to popular agnostic belief, have aided in positive growth over the years. While I'm far from perfect, the drive for self-improvement stems in part FROM those beliefs.
Note, people.... I may not necessarily follow "standard" Christian thinking as far as the birth of the universe. Don't lump me in with fanatics, and I'll try my hardest to avoid the same. Thanks for the discussion!
...and I'll do the same when someone presents solid proof. Heck, most people won't even TOUCH Kant and the ones that do wave it off with a "well, since his theory seems to have no solution, we'll ignore it."
I'm not saying I have PROOF a God exists. {refer to Douglas Adams joke here, about the babelfish..} I'm saying that NO one, for all the insults, has a verifiable proof AGAINST It/Him/Her... and for something as obvious as they say this is, they should by NOW.
If it's a Sony, I wouldn't buy it for $120. With the RIAA, rootkits, and DRM, they don't have the sense of business ethics I prefer...
It's why we've been recommending Toshiba laptops; with the exception of the Panasonic Toughbook series, they're the most solid we've seen so far...
Looking at the current crop of rich kids, I'd be willing to submit that the rich are suffering more from an educational lack than the rest of us...
I swear, when I heard "What's a well for?" I almost sprayed Dr. Pepper all over the TV.
...which would explain why Hawking had to recant a 30-year-old theory...
I'm not denying that it's guessing within a more structured framework... but honestly...
While they may have medical uses now, leeches were "state of the art" when they were used. Doctors were convinced of the science behind them... and killed one of our Founding Fathers in doing so. It's all science, right?
look for a simple (or as simple as you can make it) explanation that fits the evidence and see if that explanation has evidence contradicting it....which is what I'm asking for... If I happen to believe that a Master Engineer started the whole shebang off, fine. I'm asking for evidence otherwise.
This is where the name-calling usually starts... "Stupid creationist. You're deluding yourself."
Fine. Prove your point and show your evidence.... but if you simply can NOT do it without being insulting, you might not have that valid a point to begin with...
I didn't ask you to expound on WHY you believe as you do.
I asked which theory you believed in.
Discuss this, or admit you're running on faith just like the rest of us.
...and folks like this wonder why they're never invited to the fun parties...
Lighten up. Were you that infallible, you'd be ruling the world right now.
So far, no mention of Emperor Tar that I've heard of, other than in the tobacco industry...
-sigh-. Fine. We'll do it your way, Princess.
Feel free to explain exactly which creation theory you subscribe to, and let's see how complete it is. Beginning to end, leaving nothing to "well, it just happens that way, and we're not sure why."
Really.
You'll find that you take just as much on faith as I do; you're just more pissy when people disagree. Ye gads, man, just the trust you have in your five senses alone is astounding. Ask someone who's tried LSD for details.
I'm not saying you're wrong in your belief; I'm saying that it's still up in the air... so save the tired spiel for someone who chooses not to consider the damn near infinite possibilities the universe has to offer.
We've not even scratched the surface yet.
That's your OPINION. If you have undeniable proof otherwise, feel free to present it. Many of the spiritual ilk believe your opinions are garbage as well...but once again, that's all it is: an opinion.
Too bad for all of you "spiritual belief" is nothing but moronic delusion.Slamming my belief set without presenting evidence to the contrary isn't very scientific, Spanky...
This is what drives me nuts about fanatics on both sides of this coin: they're convinced that they somehow MUST have the key to life that the rest of us "are missing..", tend towards the snide side, and resort to name-calling when "you don't get it..."
In its pure form, I agree. It serves as a common reference point for those who're uncomfortable with using the term "God/Allah/{pick your fave}". However, not many posts after the OP talked about the FSM, we find:
Or, to put it more bluntly, a sick jokeDoes someone calling you a sick joke make for neutral comment?
...and here someone pointed out earlier that the whole point of the FSM was not to be insulting...
Tell ya what. I'll happily buy that when the FSM can be used in a discussion thread WITHOUT someone slamming the spiritual beliefs of others.
Note: I did not use the word "religion". Big difference 'tween being religious and bein' spiritual.
As for the CR violation? Take 'em to court jus' like anyone else. Get a C&D order. This isn't news... unless you were LOOKING for a flame-fest 'tween two opposing sides.
That, and worse. However, you're missing a very big point:
The police are not a conscripted force.
They deal with murderers, rapists, and worse.... by choice. I can appreciate that choice and their efforts... but it doesn't change the fact that they chose to apply for that job. As with ANY person in uniform, on the public dole, the police are supposed to work under our terms, not whichever ethical mindset they wake up with that day. At the end of the day, the police chief reports to a civilian. That civvie {usually the mayor, or sometimes a council} calls the shots.
Yes, Virginia, the police are accountable for unprofessional behavior just as the rest of us are...
...and you've never seen the Autobahn at its best. No speed limit, and it WORKS. Why? Drivers who want to KEEP that lack of a speed limit driving at high rates in a usually logical manner.
I've seen it in motion. Fraggin' beautiful.
Not typically, though it DOES happen. In fact, in the first month after XP debuted, we had around 8 clients that ran out, bought it, and tried to install it, totally ignoring the sysreqs. The guy with the 486 stands out. As for Vista "upgrade" installs, I've only seen two of that type; most people I've talked to want nothing to do with Vista, citing the negative buzz.
I did not install it on my 4 year old machine, but it runs just fine one the new machine I just bought.I see....and on this new machine you JUST bought, what does Vista say the Windows Experience Rating is?
all the software I ran on the old box runs better/much better on the vista box.App list, please, and while you're at it, could you more accurately define "better/much better"? I'm asking for curiosity; I've seen info to the contrary.