If natural is taken to mean the common sense of anything that exists in this world,
a supernatural thing acting/observing in a natural world, must be natural by definition.
And this is more than trick with definitions:
On what does God base his decisions? It's on a what he sees, which means he is as limited by cause and effect just as everything else.
You should add a safe guard for that. Something that would slow the fan down, but still properly communicate the seriousness of the situation. For example:
It's definately not bullshit, art is pretty simple actually to define:
Anything anyone would call art is art. (In other words, you're free to make your own definition.) But generally people consider art, that which most people would call art. And this is usually stuff that has no other clear purpose but looking/sounding nice. Thirdly, people who know a lot of art tend to have a somewhat different taste in art and they are also normally the ones who define "high art" since they will put it in museums or pay a lot of money for it. (Generally they like things that showed a fresh way of thinking, historically. Or sometimes art that requires extreme skill. Or the very, very nice looking stuff.)
There is no such thing as "not White hat material". In essence if a malicious attacker could use it, the security tester should try it. Physical access is part of the security problem and one that is generally underestimated. There are no rules. If you can physically mess with a system that system is also compromised.
He should not have been able to install a keylogger that is active at login or active during sessions of other users.
Regulation can free up a market, you know. And a free market can 'close' itself if not properly regulated.
The simplest example is regulation against monopolies. But others like preventing lock-ins can do that as well. Or like setting minimum standards in special markets such as healthcare. Or like protecting intellectual property. Or like forbidding cartels. Or like nationalizing services too big or expensive or important to leave up to private companies.
A market is free if the consumer can get what she wants for a price comparable to it's costs.
The biggest problem the US might actually have is it's very poor city planning. It's all based on car transport.
Just look at how US suburbs are designed, you can't get anywhere by foot, except your nearest neighbours. There are no bicycle lanes anywhere. Cheap and pervasive public transport is difficult because of lack of centralisation.
And they shouldn't be crying over $5 per gallon, the last time petrol was $5 per gallon in The Netherlands was 1991 (source: http://statline.cbs.nl/). They should cry over their city planning.
Well see, that's a mistake. Religious people tend to equate realizing there is no God with believing there is no God.
However, the two are fundamentally different. One view is based on unassuming, open and critical thinking. When you 'believe' there is no God, you assume it to be true and bend your interpretation of reality towards it. Just like people do when they believe there is a God.
No-one who is truly unassuming and is capable of accepting something as "not yet completely explicable" will arrive at the notion of a God. Some self-conscious entity pulling invisible strings in a world completely defined by laws he apparently set himself. Retarded.
Folks in the quatum world shed causality for randomness.
The beauty of this statement is, it doesn't matter if you can not directly observe it, it doesn't matter if you can't proof it empirically, it even doesn't matter if you talk metaphysics!
Something either has a cause, or it doesn't.
Even if that cause is metaphysical, it's still a cause.
Hence God is bound by either causality or randomness.
If there was "something" inside each of us, an internal factor, a soul if you want, then would "it" base its actions on something else? or not?
No ofcourse not. I don't know why this isn't general knowledge, but something like will can only be 2 things:
- Completely determined process, action -> reaction. - Completely random process, governed by random quantum effects.
Our brain ofcourse is somewhere in between. I don't know how you define free will, but it can not be different from these 2 things. If it were.. Then there would somehow be a reaction without an action, but it would NOT be random! This is obviously impossible.
Everybody should know there is no such thing as free will. One of the most interesting corollaries is the responsibility paradox: - You have no free will. - Thus you are not responsible for your actions; All your actions are the result of the total sum of your past, surroundings and genes. - You could do whatever you like, because you are not responsible.
People say, "If I can not control what I do, I'm not responsible, so I can do anything." They forget that 'they' are part of the action-reaction process. There is a part where you are conscious of the choices you make. What this simply means is that you know you choose. But how you make that choice is determined but all kinds of factors you do not control. "Will I eat this?" -yes, because it looks tasty (instinctive) -no, because it will make me fat (logic, cultural knowledge) -etc.. Your choice process is then thinking of and weighing the factors, but again these weights are not controlled by anything like free will. It's controlled by randomness, (neural) logic and cultural influences.
The "I can do anything" phrase is simply a loopback to the choice process, however as you consider the consequenses of this new factor, you realize you are bound by external factors in everything you do.
I hear this a lot. Somehow the US is more ``free'' than most European countries. In fact the US is all about freedom so much as if there is none else where!
Yes, Christian, over-protective and politically correct politicians considered if a ban was an option. Ofcourse this absolutely impossible, I don't know where they get those ideas from.
More likely it's just a way of saying what they think of it. Just like the ``deepthroat on national television'' issue.
Constitutionally, speech in The Netherlands is just as free as in the US, apart from some WW2 relics like holocaust denial and Hitler's Mein Kampf. You'd be hard pressed to give more examples.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say The Netherlands is more free than the US. Media in the US sometimes suffers from self-censorship and is also ridiculously prudish.
Consider for example speaking critically of the US support for Israel and the very racially motivated holocaust-in-slow-motion of the Palestinians.
And what about that unthinkable banning of the Dixie Chicks because of a single critical line:
Just so you know, were on the good side with yall. We do not want this war, this violence, and were ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.
The US suffers from a corporate censorship, from businesses with a political motivation.
I realise your comment is 3 days old, but I'll post this anyway.
Figments of their imagination (and others imagination), obviously.
Personally, I pray to John, Tim, Alan, Steve and Susan..
"Please get the fuck out of my head"
IMHO, the best approach is to design something bottum up.
Then throw that away and design it again top-down.
However with software engineering the designing and developing the solution is very rarely a problem. The problems we always see are created by extra functionality or different functionality that was added in hindsight. Thus, the most important part of the design process thoroughly determining the functional requirements and then carve it in stone. Which is something you don't do when designign bottum-up, btw.
If you actually read the article...
"The current picture is that galaxies form inside of dark matter halos," Diemand told New Scientist. The dark matter's gravity attracts ordinary gas, which can then coagulate into stars.
"It is unclear how one would form a galaxy without a dark halo, or how one could remove the halo without destroying the galaxy," says Diemand. "A galaxy without dark matter really does not fit into our current understanding of cosmology and galaxy formation." There, apparantly dark matter makes a difference.
Yikes, you actually think the government takes care of drug addicts and bums? The left/socialist part of the US politics is more to the right then several right wing parties in Europe. Which basically means the bottomfeeders of society get null.
Whatever happened to the "We help each other"-motto?
I lot of studets I know have synchronous 100Mbit connections to the world. And they get it for nigh nothing because it comes with the housing. Unfortunately I have to pay for my lousy 1 up / 20 Mbit down connection.
Utter nonsense. If language support was lacking Windows would never have been embraced at all.
Microsoft publishes all it's programs in every European language imaginable. And if not, French would be the first they'd support, they're not stupid when it comes to marketing.
Anyway, maybe they're switching because it just makes sense financially?
A more interesting question is, what is keeping the US government from switching? Are they more deeply locked-in or are they more willing to throw some money towards a good friend?
Slashdot Mirror
If natural is taken to mean the common sense of anything that exists in this world, a supernatural thing acting/observing in a natural world, must be natural by definition. And this is more than trick with definitions: On what does God base his decisions? It's on a what he sees, which means he is as limited by cause and effect just as everything else.
"The degree of civilization a society exhibits is best determined by how it treats its prisoners." - Dostoyevsky
The U.S. is one of the worst in the world. Abu Ghraib was no fluke.
U.S. handles prisoners based on punishment, not help.
You have a typically wrong view of Africa. The continent is not all poverty and hunger. It has a mixed set of highs and lows.
See this entertaining talk:
http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/hans_rosling_shows_the_best_stats_you_ve_ever_seen.html/
You should add a safe guard for that. Something that would slow the fan down, but still properly communicate the seriousness of the situation.
For example:
if rpm > 6900 then
let shit hit the fan.
In some countries the government actually serves and reflects the opinions of it's population.
So the government takes care of the elderly because the taxpayers want it to.
--
I know it sounds funny, which is what makes it so sad.
It's definately not bullshit, art is pretty simple actually to define:
Anything anyone would call art is art. (In other words, you're free to make your own definition.)
But generally people consider art, that which most people would call art. And this is usually stuff that has no other clear purpose but looking/sounding nice.
Thirdly, people who know a lot of art tend to have a somewhat different taste in art and they are also normally the ones who define "high art" since they will put it in museums or pay a lot of money for it. (Generally they like things that showed a fresh way of thinking, historically. Or sometimes art that requires extreme skill. Or the very, very nice looking stuff.)
Think man.
The real costs are already there, lack of safety standards is a costs.
"You're poor and easily bullied. But don't get yourself bullied cause then it's 'not entirely wrong' for us to bully you."
That's what you're saying essentially.
There is no such thing as "not White hat material". In essence if a malicious attacker could use it, the security tester should try it. Physical access is part of the security problem and one that is generally underestimated.
There are no rules. If you can physically mess with a system that system is also compromised.
He should not have been able to install a keylogger that is active at login or active during sessions of other users.
Regulation can free up a market, you know. And a free market can 'close' itself if not properly regulated.
The simplest example is regulation against monopolies.
But others like preventing lock-ins can do that as well.
Or like setting minimum standards in special markets such as healthcare.
Or like protecting intellectual property.
Or like forbidding cartels.
Or like nationalizing services too big or expensive or important to leave up to private companies.
A market is free if the consumer can get what she wants for a price comparable to it's costs.
Wait, why don't they know the identity of the withdrawer?
The biggest problem the US might actually have is it's very poor city planning. It's all based on car transport.
Just look at how US suburbs are designed, you can't get anywhere by foot, except your nearest neighbours. There are no bicycle lanes anywhere. Cheap and pervasive public transport is difficult because of lack of centralisation.
And they shouldn't be crying over $5 per gallon, the last time petrol was $5 per gallon in The Netherlands was 1991 (source: http://statline.cbs.nl/). They should cry over their city planning.
Both correct. Also in the summer no cooling is necessary and in the winter we only need minimal amounts of heating because the house is well isolated.
Well shame on you. Why the heck are you still using regular bulbs. Energy saving bulbs not only save energy, they also last a lot longer.
The 3-person household I live in used 2000 kWh last year. That's slightly more then two of your kitchen light bulbs on at all times.
Do something about it.
Ofcourse you can always adjust your cache size in Opera if it's using too much memory.
Which makes this test kind of silly (as long as there are no memory leaks).
Well see, that's a mistake. Religious people tend to equate realizing there is no God with believing there is no God.
However, the two are fundamentally different. One view is based on unassuming, open and critical thinking. When you 'believe' there is no God, you assume it to be true and bend your interpretation of reality towards it. Just like people do when they believe there is a God.
No-one who is truly unassuming and is capable of accepting something as "not yet completely explicable" will arrive at the notion of a God. Some self-conscious entity pulling invisible strings in a world completely defined by laws he apparently set himself. Retarded.
Folks in the quatum world shed causality for randomness. The beauty of this statement is, it doesn't matter if you can not directly observe it, it doesn't matter if you can't proof it empirically, it even doesn't matter if you talk metaphysics! Something either has a cause, or it doesn't. Even if that cause is metaphysical, it's still a cause. Hence God is bound by either causality or randomness. If there was "something" inside each of us, an internal factor, a soul if you want, then would "it" base its actions on something else? or not?
No ofcourse not. I don't know why this isn't general knowledge, but something like will can only be 2 things:
- Completely determined process, action -> reaction.
- Completely random process, governed by random quantum effects.
Our brain ofcourse is somewhere in between. I don't know how you define free will, but it can not be different from these 2 things.
If it were..
Then there would somehow be a reaction without an action, but it would NOT be random!
This is obviously impossible.
Everybody should know there is no such thing as free will.
One of the most interesting corollaries is the responsibility paradox:
- You have no free will.
- Thus you are not responsible for your actions; All your actions are the result of the total sum of your past, surroundings and genes.
- You could do whatever you like, because you are not responsible.
People say, "If I can not control what I do, I'm not responsible, so I can do anything."
They forget that 'they' are part of the action-reaction process. There is a part where you are conscious of the choices you make.
What this simply means is that you know you choose. But how you make that choice is determined but all kinds of factors you do not control.
"Will I eat this?"
-yes, because it looks tasty (instinctive)
-no, because it will make me fat (logic, cultural knowledge)
-etc..
Your choice process is then thinking of and weighing the factors, but again these weights are not controlled by anything like free will.
It's controlled by randomness, (neural) logic and cultural influences.
The "I can do anything" phrase is simply a loopback to the choice process, however as you consider the consequenses of this new factor, you realize you are bound by external factors in everything you do.
Yes, Christian, over-protective and politically correct politicians considered if a ban was an option. Ofcourse this absolutely impossible, I don't know where they get those ideas from. More likely it's just a way of saying what they think of it. Just like the ``deepthroat on national television'' issue.
Constitutionally, speech in The Netherlands is just as free as in the US, apart from some WW2 relics like holocaust denial and Hitler's Mein Kampf. You'd be hard pressed to give more examples.
In fact, I'd go so far as to say The Netherlands is more free than the US. Media in the US sometimes suffers from self-censorship and is also ridiculously prudish.
Consider for example speaking critically of the US support for Israel and the very racially motivated holocaust-in-slow-motion of the Palestinians.
And what about that unthinkable banning of the Dixie Chicks because of a single critical line:
Just so you know, were on the good side with yall. We do not want this war, this violence, and were ashamed that the President of the United States is from Texas.
The US suffers from a corporate censorship, from businesses with a political motivation.I realise your comment is 3 days old, but I'll post this anyway.
Figments of their imagination (and others imagination), obviously. Personally, I pray to John, Tim, Alan, Steve and Susan.. "Please get the fuck out of my head"
IMHO, the best approach is to design something bottum up.
Then throw that away and design it again top-down.
However with software engineering the designing and developing the solution is very rarely a problem. The problems we always see are created by extra functionality or different functionality that was added in hindsight. Thus, the most important part of the design process thoroughly determining the functional requirements and then carve it in stone. Which is something you don't do when designign bottum-up, btw.
"It is unclear how one would form a galaxy without a dark halo, or how one could remove the halo without destroying the galaxy," says Diemand. "A galaxy without dark matter really does not fit into our current understanding of cosmology and galaxy formation." There, apparantly dark matter makes a difference.
Yikes, you actually think the government takes care of drug addicts and bums? The left/socialist part of the US politics is more to the right then several right wing parties in Europe. Which basically means the bottomfeeders of society get null.
Whatever happened to the "We help each other"-motto?
I lot of studets I know have synchronous 100Mbit connections to the world. And they get it for nigh nothing because it comes with the housing. Unfortunately I have to pay for my lousy 1 up / 20 Mbit down connection.
Well, yes that's certainly true, Sarkozy seems to be quite the nepotist.
If there were any French OS's, Linux wouldn't have made it.
Utter nonsense. If language support was lacking Windows would never have been embraced at all. Microsoft publishes all it's programs in every European language imaginable. And if not, French would be the first they'd support, they're not stupid when it comes to marketing.
Anyway, maybe they're switching because it just makes sense financially?
A more interesting question is, what is keeping the US government from switching? Are they more deeply locked-in or are they more willing to throw some money towards a good friend?