Re Iraqi children: The US invades another country under the pretence that there are dangerous WMDs. While doing so, the US poisons the ground and water with depleted uranium (used in the ammunition, and extremely toxic) as they've done in Iraq -91 and former Jugoslavia after that. The DU will continue killing civilians for many years ahead, especially newborn children.
There's no reason for this. The DU weapons weren't, and aren't, necessary for whatever justified action the US pretends to have. Thus, the conservative Christian in charge must feel that Iraqi children (born and unborn) should be killed.
That's the justification I don't understand. What can it be?
Usually when bringing this up with americans they start talking about terrorists and the less than 3000 americans killed in the WTC attack - as if that is even relevant.
If you knew anything of hermeneutics, then you would understand the timeless principals in the dated contexts. These principals are not themselves dated.
I know a lot of religious history on the other hand, and I know that while scholars would like to extend the teachings to apply to other times as well (especially Revelations) the best explanation is always found in the current time or near future for any profet in any of the holy books. Occam's razor thus tells us that that's indeed what they were referring to.
Beside the fact that Christians do not regard this "Gospel of Thomas" as part of the canon, this bit, like other parts of scripture, is meaningless when taken out of context.
That is always interesting. What's a Christian? Someone who studies the teachings of Christ - or someone who follows the religion created by Paulus and later changed radically by Constantin?
I'm much more interested in what Jesus actually taught than what gospels fit in with Constantin's idea of rule in his empire:) Thus, the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary are two very important pieces of scripture if you want to understand Jesus.
(I think you failed to understand why I brought up unborn Iraqi children, but it's a path rarely worth travelling with americans today. Sorry. Maybe in 10-20 years time.)
Your use of "faith" is quite vague. What would you have corrected?
Moses had an agenda. Jesus/Joshua had an agenda. Mohammed had an agenda. While great inspirational leaders, and people who's thoughts are well worth the time to understand, those agendas were specific to their respective times and peers.
That's what faith (in the name of organized religion) has problems correcting today.
Assuming you're Christian, the single most enlightening saying of Jesus' is this.
We've strayed far from the original point though:)
I also agree that we can consciously define right and wrong, and let it influence our actions. However, very often a large group goes into a more psycotic state - something we've inherited as a biological/genetic trait. The current violent outlash towards everything "arab/muslim" in the US is a good example. (US military using depleted uranium ammuniation is killing newborn and unborn civilian Iraqi babies in the thousands - how can that be justified even in american Fox News-influented minds?)
Anyway. Conscience is something we've not yet understood (like we didn't know the earth was round at some points in history). There's an interesting possibility that it's a state of quantum wavefunctions constantly collapsing into thoughts/paths etc.
Science is good at admitting we don't know everything, yet, and correcting itself when we've learnt more. That's not a property of faith, however.
evolution is undeniably losing credibility among scientists
Not true.
if you are going to start declaring that any behavior observed among animals is valid for people, you are headed down a very slippery slope...
Why - since it's true? Read "The Lucifer Principle" (no, it has nothing to do with fallen angels) for insights into just how much we do follow the same genetic behaviour paths as many animals.
... which is good. You _don't know_ why the person behind you is speeding. I've myself sped to the hospital with an almost non-breathing person beside me (yes, sometimes it is faster to drive yourself than to call an ambulance, depending on where in the woods you're living)
Lay people often misinterpret the language used by scientists. And for that reason, they sometimes draw the wrong conclusions as to what the scientific terms mean.
4 of the top 10 games of all time made by Nintendo?
Sounds about right, yes?
I haven't even clicked the link yet, but I assume two of those are Super Mario Bros 3 and Super Metroid. Maybe they've gone for Super Mario Bros 1 instead though.
Feel free to add any sources to your figures. Analysts make good guesses as to how much each console costs to make at various points in time - but you're implying you know exact numbers from different manufacturers.
You'll have to excuse me if that's very hard to believe without some sort of source.
(I usually fall back to Gord and interviews with Nintendo regarding what I wrote - but I'd be pleasantly surprised if you have something that good)
Do you really think they can make and distrubte them for $100?
Yes
Don't say you went for the _myth_ that all console hardware is sold at a loss? While Sega and Microsoft tried/tries that, Sony (up until the PSP) and Nintendo don't.
(PS: The Gamecube has never been sold at a loss - with one exception. For a few months after the drop to $99 Nintendo did admit to a "slight" temporary loss until the manufacturing costs went down. If that's what you meant then I stand corrected, but it didn't sound that way)
Softmods and changes to where you should solder are not hacks in the same sense as the holes in v1.0 (cleartext key on a bus) or v1.1 (bad hash-algorithms, not closing earlier disclosed holes). The only change to the MCPX (the "security chip" in the Xbox) came between v1.0 and v1.1. Nothing they made to any subsequent revision closed any of the holes that allowed modchips to function at all.
New hardware meant new BIOS revisions were needed. New board layouts meant new solder points were needed. However, after v1.1 there were _no_ new security systems added and thus the actual modchip functionality and security bypasses are the same.
(I agree with you regarding piracy. I also claim Sony did it on purpose with the PS1 and now PSP, and Microsoft realised they should do it as well when Xbox v1.1 was broken [they never tried to close the holes in the Xbox again after that])
I agree that it makes _porting_ more complex - and I haven't done normal C++ exception coding for a very long time so you might be right in that they've now surpassed the CleanupStack.
I am however a former Symbian employee (developer) - and some of the solutions the clever people at Psion came up with when developing Epoc are even today better than their counterparts either in the languages or comparable solutions at other companies.
If only more companies used something similar to the CleanupStack we'd have lot less memory leaks. The care taken in Symbian with constructors vs leaving "constructors" is unheard of in most places I've worked.
If you want to complain about something in Symbian I'd target the descriptors instead. They make porting a nightmare, and Symbian should've implemented CString/TString a long long time ago:)
2) It is built with GCC 2.92 where the support for exceptions was not good. They had to implement their own exception handling and a mechanism called the CleanupStack for freeing dynamically allocated memory in the event of an exception. It is unavoidably complex to use, non portable and the biggest bane to a Symbian C++ developer's existence.
The CleanupStack and Leave-functionality is a lot older than that. It's older than the concept of exceptions in C++:) It's also better.
4) Java on the phones is so crippled (e.g. not being able to open a file)
Nintendo have gone out of their way to say that the DS is NOT the successor to the GBA, that they are working on such a successor and that the DS is the "third pillar".
I must question whether you've automatically assumed everything above or if you've really tested it. The flow does _not_ become more complicated (goto messes it up a lot more) - and the variables I need to keep track of are exactly the same that I would need to check in the goto:ed codeblock anyway to know what should be cleaned up and what shouldn't.
By the way, as a hint remember that C does not have constructors
That was the whole point of my previous reply:)
Using goto to break flow makes your code _more_ likely to contain resource leaks. Since my profession is telecom/embedded I might automatically think more about those cases than most.
No such time has ever existed. There's always been inventiones, ways to make life better. You _do_ know that we affected climate already thousands of years ago?
You're talking about C++? Then you should use exceptions. The discussion was about C, and the use of goto to do single-point error handling. Please look up the other answer I gave to someone who posted code my practice supposedly shouldn't be able to handle (it's in the same thread as we're posting in now).
What I was looking for was C-code using goto that I shouldn't be able to rewrite like this. I'm still searching:)
Slashdot Mirror
Re Iraqi children: The US invades another country under the pretence that there are dangerous WMDs. While doing so, the US poisons the ground and water with depleted uranium (used in the ammunition, and extremely toxic) as they've done in Iraq -91 and former Jugoslavia after that. The DU will continue killing civilians for many years ahead, especially newborn children.
:) Thus, the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary are two very important pieces of scripture if you want to understand Jesus.
There's no reason for this. The DU weapons weren't, and aren't, necessary for whatever justified action the US pretends to have. Thus, the conservative Christian in charge must feel that Iraqi children (born and unborn) should be killed.
That's the justification I don't understand. What can it be?
Usually when bringing this up with americans they start talking about terrorists and the less than 3000 americans killed in the WTC attack - as if that is even relevant.
If you knew anything of hermeneutics, then you would understand the timeless principals in the dated contexts. These principals are not themselves dated.
I know a lot of religious history on the other hand, and I know that while scholars would like to extend the teachings to apply to other times as well (especially Revelations) the best explanation is always found in the current time or near future for any profet in any of the holy books. Occam's razor thus tells us that that's indeed what they were referring to.
Beside the fact that Christians do not regard this "Gospel of Thomas" as part of the canon, this bit, like other parts of scripture, is meaningless when taken out of context.
That is always interesting. What's a Christian? Someone who studies the teachings of Christ - or someone who follows the religion created by Paulus and later changed radically by Constantin?
I'm much more interested in what Jesus actually taught than what gospels fit in with Constantin's idea of rule in his empire
(I think you failed to understand why I brought up unborn Iraqi children, but it's a path rarely worth travelling with americans today. Sorry. Maybe in 10-20 years time.)
:)
Your use of "faith" is quite vague. What would you have corrected?
Moses had an agenda. Jesus/Joshua had an agenda. Mohammed had an agenda. While great inspirational leaders, and people who's thoughts are well worth the time to understand, those agendas were specific to their respective times and peers.
That's what faith (in the name of organized religion) has problems correcting today.
Assuming you're Christian, the single most enlightening saying of Jesus' is this.
We've strayed far from the original point though
Sorry. I'm a non-native English speaker and I read your post too quickly. Exchange "conscience" with "consciousness" in my first reply.
Conscience is much easier. We want our group to survive, not only ourselves.
I also agree that we can consciously define right and wrong, and let it influence our actions. However, very often a large group goes into a more psycotic state - something we've inherited as a biological/genetic trait. The current violent outlash towards everything "arab/muslim" in the US is a good example. (US military using depleted uranium ammuniation is killing newborn and unborn civilian Iraqi babies in the thousands - how can that be justified even in american Fox News-influented minds?)
Anyway. Conscience is something we've not yet understood (like we didn't know the earth was round at some points in history). There's an interesting possibility that it's a state of quantum wavefunctions constantly collapsing into thoughts/paths etc.
Science is good at admitting we don't know everything, yet, and correcting itself when we've learnt more. That's not a property of faith, however.
evolution is undeniably losing credibility among scientists
Not true.
if you are going to start declaring that any behavior observed among animals is valid for people, you are headed down a very slippery slope...
Why - since it's true? Read "The Lucifer Principle" (no, it has nothing to do with fallen angels) for insights into just how much we do follow the same genetic behaviour paths as many animals.
... which is good. You _don't know_ why the person behind you is speeding. I've myself sped to the hospital with an almost non-breathing person beside me (yes, sometimes it is faster to drive yourself than to call an ambulance, depending on where in the woods you're living)
Lay people often misinterpret the language used by scientists. And for that reason, they sometimes draw the wrong conclusions as to what the scientific terms mean.
Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis.
Homosexuality in animals (touches on evolution)
Homosexuality is both supported by evolution and is common in other animals as well. I fail to understand your post in that respect.
... and when you played Super Metroid, your thoughts were?
4 of the top 10 games of all time made by Nintendo?
...
Sounds about right, yes?
I haven't even clicked the link yet, but I assume two of those are Super Mario Bros 3 and Super Metroid. Maybe they've gone for Super Mario Bros 1 instead though.
Now I'll go check
Feel free to add any sources to your figures. Analysts make good guesses as to how much each console costs to make at various points in time - but you're implying you know exact numbers from different manufacturers.
You'll have to excuse me if that's very hard to believe without some sort of source.
(I usually fall back to Gord and interviews with Nintendo regarding what I wrote - but I'd be pleasantly surprised if you have something that good)
Nintendo loses money on each GC made and sold
No
Do you really think they can make and distrubte them for $100?
Yes
Don't say you went for the _myth_ that all console hardware is sold at a loss? While Sega and Microsoft tried/tries that, Sony (up until the PSP) and Nintendo don't.
(PS: The Gamecube has never been sold at a loss - with one exception. For a few months after the drop to $99 Nintendo did admit to a "slight" temporary loss until the manufacturing costs went down. If that's what you meant then I stand corrected, but it didn't sound that way)
No.
(I'm one of the original Xbox hackers)
Softmods and changes to where you should solder are not hacks in the same sense as the holes in v1.0 (cleartext key on a bus) or v1.1 (bad hash-algorithms, not closing earlier disclosed holes). The only change to the MCPX (the "security chip" in the Xbox) came between v1.0 and v1.1. Nothing they made to any subsequent revision closed any of the holes that allowed modchips to function at all.
New hardware meant new BIOS revisions were needed. New board layouts meant new solder points were needed. However, after v1.1 there were _no_ new security systems added and thus the actual modchip functionality and security bypasses are the same.
ViperGC + mini-dvdr (RitekG04 layer preferably)
Direct boot of your "homemade backups"
What are you waiting for now?
(I agree with you regarding piracy. I also claim Sony did it on purpose with the PS1 and now PSP, and Microsoft realised they should do it as well when Xbox v1.1 was broken [they never tried to close the holes in the Xbox again after that])
I agree that it makes _porting_ more complex - and I haven't done normal C++ exception coding for a very long time so you might be right in that they've now surpassed the CleanupStack.
:)
I am however a former Symbian employee (developer) - and some of the solutions the clever people at Psion came up with when developing Epoc are even today better than their counterparts either in the languages or comparable solutions at other companies.
If only more companies used something similar to the CleanupStack we'd have lot less memory leaks. The care taken in Symbian with constructors vs leaving "constructors" is unheard of in most places I've worked.
If you want to complain about something in Symbian I'd target the descriptors instead. They make porting a nightmare, and Symbian should've implemented CString/TString a long long time ago
2) It is built with GCC 2.92 where the support for exceptions was not good. They had to implement their own exception handling and a mechanism called the CleanupStack for freeing dynamically allocated memory in the event of an exception. It is unavoidably complex to use, non portable and the biggest bane to a Symbian C++ developer's existence.
:) It's also better.
The CleanupStack and Leave-functionality is a lot older than that. It's older than the concept of exceptions in C++
4) Java on the phones is so crippled (e.g. not being able to open a file)
JSR-75 include file support.
... and on the same topic. It's more likely that we are living in a simulation than that we aren't.
http://www.simulation-argument.com
Oh, and of course the United States did not systematically annihilate 6+ million human beings on purpose. I almost forgot that small detail.
Oh but you are.
Nintendo have gone out of their way to say that the DS is NOT the successor to the GBA, that they are working on such a successor and that the DS is the "third pillar".
Nintendo is no longer a true competitor to these two
True. Nintendo _makes_ money. Microsoft and Sony lose money.
I think you'd be interested in Coalescent: Homo Superior if you haven't already read it of course.
Human hives possible?
people don't "observe the universe from the outside"
:)
http://www.simulation-argument.com/
I must question whether you've automatically assumed everything above or if you've really tested it. The flow does _not_ become more complicated (goto messes it up a lot more) - and the variables I need to keep track of are exactly the same that I would need to check in the goto:ed codeblock anyway to know what should be cleaned up and what shouldn't.
:)
By the way, as a hint remember that C does not have constructors
That was the whole point of my previous reply
Using goto to break flow makes your code _more_ likely to contain resource leaks. Since my profession is telecom/embedded I might automatically think more about those cases than most.
Prior to the development of technology
No such time has ever existed. There's always been inventiones, ways to make life better. You _do_ know that we affected climate already thousands of years ago?
My proof is thus in our history.
You're talking about C++? Then you should use exceptions. The discussion was about C, and the use of goto to do single-point error handling. Please look up the other answer I gave to someone who posted code my practice supposedly shouldn't be able to handle (it's in the same thread as we're posting in now).
:)
What I was looking for was C-code using goto that I shouldn't be able to rewrite like this. I'm still searching