The last comment about companies which have a vested interest (and let me add Google) in people adopting an open standard is very pertinent.
What do we expect Microsoft to do? Document standards, in my opinion, are the lynch pin of their entire dominance. Move to open file standards and they are in deep trouble.
Those companies who want to end that dominance need to step up to the plate. Microsoft has a right to withhold campaign funding. They have a right to lobby. But so do their opponents.
From the article: The researchers also examinedevidence from five independent, agreeing studies involving structuraland genetic analyses related to the "tridactyl," or three-fingered,hand, which is composed of digits 1, 2 and 3 in dinosaurs, Feducciasaid. That is the most critical characteristic linking birds todinosaurs. They found that embryos of developing birds differedsignificantly in that bird wings arose from digits 2, 3 and 4, theequivalent of index, middle and ring fingers of humans. To change soradically during evolution would be highly unlikely.
"If birds descended from dinosaurs, we would expect the same 1, 2 and 3 pattern," he said.
Currentdinosaurian dogma requires that all the intricate adaptations of birds'wings and feathers for flight evolved in a flightless dinosaur and thensomehow became useful for flight only much later, Feduccia said. Thatis "close to being non-Darwinian."
I'm still disagreeing with this assessment. I think a lot of Marxism is based on envy since they feel the need to solve the "problem" that some people have some stuff and others have more stuff.
Practically, it usually involves having everyone having very little.
If it bothers you that someone has more than you, that's envy. Getting rid of envy through Marxism is like getting rid of racism by ethnic cleansing.
Are we going to be able to see the source code?
on
Palm to go Linux
·
· Score: 1
I'd be curious to see the details of distribution. Do they have an obligation to provide the source code? I would think so, but I don't feel like getting into the details of the GPL.
...except securing American Independance, ending slavery, ending Naziism, getting rid of the totalitarian dictatorship in Japan, quicken the end of the Soviet Regime, etc., etc.
I don't think the Beatles or their heirs are doing anything radically different from the 60s, at least in terms of business. They are still charging for music.
I understand what you are saying. Many in the ID movement, like Behe, believe in common descent. Some don't.
When I use "Darwinism" I am trying to say "atheistic materialism." If you ask an atheistic materialist "can you have life begin by something other than purely naturalistic means?" the answer will be no.
There is more to say in regards to all the other elements you raised.
I'm not confusing those. But Darwinists need a materialist Origin of Life scenario. And I don't see any. And I'll make a prediction. None will be found. This isn't based on ignorance. This is based on what science knows about about single-celled life.
I like the interface over the old one. But I find it to be much, much slower. My guess would be that there are numerous connections going on in the background.
My freedom ends at the tip of your nose. Stallman's intentions for greater freedom may be good. But I have the feeling he wants to control the behavior of other people.
Real freedom is allowing people to use free software for good or ill.
We use a lot of corn to make corn syrup to get around the sugar tariff to protect La. sugar growers. Let's get rid of that, reduce the demand for corn, and lower corn prices.
Increased corn prices isn't good for areas where corn is a staple. That may not be a justification for eliminating the subsidy as higher prices would lead to more corn being grown.
In other words, the person making the decision within a company only has downsides for them. Many decisions are based around not doing something wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
And if you don't need Office do you need Windows?
The last comment about companies which have a vested interest (and let me add Google) in people adopting an open standard is very pertinent.
What do we expect Microsoft to do? Document standards, in my opinion, are the lynch pin of their entire dominance. Move to open file standards and they are in deep trouble.
Those companies who want to end that dominance need to step up to the plate. Microsoft has a right to withhold campaign funding. They have a right to lobby. But so do their opponents.
being able to shut down the opposition of its freedom of speech in a country is worth of newsspace.
After reading this, does anyone really want government controlling our entire health care system?
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/10/05101 0085411.htm
From the article:
The researchers also examinedevidence from five independent, agreeing studies involving structuraland genetic analyses related to the "tridactyl," or three-fingered,hand, which is composed of digits 1, 2 and 3 in dinosaurs, Feducciasaid. That is the most critical characteristic linking birds todinosaurs. They found that embryos of developing birds differedsignificantly in that bird wings arose from digits 2, 3 and 4, theequivalent of index, middle and ring fingers of humans. To change soradically during evolution would be highly unlikely.
"If birds descended from dinosaurs, we would expect the same 1, 2 and 3 pattern," he said.
Currentdinosaurian dogma requires that all the intricate adaptations of birds'wings and feathers for flight evolved in a flightless dinosaur and thensomehow became useful for flight only much later, Feduccia said. Thatis "close to being non-Darwinian."
I'm still disagreeing with this assessment. I think a lot of Marxism is based on envy since they feel the need to solve the "problem" that some people have some stuff and others have more stuff.
Practically, it usually involves having everyone having very little.
If it bothers you that someone has more than you, that's envy. Getting rid of envy through Marxism is like getting rid of racism by ethnic cleansing.
I'd be curious to see the details of distribution. Do they have an obligation to provide the source code? I would think so, but I don't feel like getting into the details of the GPL.
That will reduce the amount of Marxists running around.
...except securing American Independance, ending slavery, ending Naziism, getting rid of the totalitarian dictatorship in Japan, quicken the end of the Soviet Regime, etc., etc.
I don't think the Beatles or their heirs are doing anything radically different from the 60s, at least in terms of business. They are still charging for music.
I understand what you are saying. Many in the ID movement, like Behe, believe in common descent. Some don't.
When I use "Darwinism" I am trying to say "atheistic materialism." If you ask an atheistic materialist "can you have life begin by something other than purely naturalistic means?" the answer will be no.
There is more to say in regards to all the other elements you raised.
I'm not confusing those. But Darwinists need a materialist Origin of Life scenario. And I don't see any. And I'll make a prediction. None will be found. This isn't based on ignorance. This is based on what science knows about about single-celled life.
Good post, btw.
http://pubs.acs.org/cen/coverstory/85/8513cover1.h tml
Go to the above link by a Darwinist. Faith commitments seem to be holding Darwinist Origin of Life scenarios together.
You never hear about 'Ninja' trials.
That's the real question.
I like the interface over the old one. But I find it to be much, much slower. My guess would be that there are numerous connections going on in the background.
My freedom ends at the tip of your nose. Stallman's intentions for greater freedom may be good. But I have the feeling he wants to control the behavior of other people.
Real freedom is allowing people to use free software for good or ill.
This is incorporating both. The concepts aren't necessarily contradictory. Blind natural selection + random mutation and ID are mutually exclusive.
When was the last time someone saw an Apple in a federal work area? I'm not being snarky. Seriously, when?
Good response. Let me retort/clarify.
When they stand up to a country they are afraid of. The United States isn't going to do anything to France. They weren't going to sever economic ties.
But good retort. I'll have to clarify how to explain it more in my head.
When the French stand up to a country without the impulse towards appeasement, the French surrender jokes will cease.
We use a lot of corn to make corn syrup to get around the sugar tariff to protect La. sugar growers. Let's get rid of that, reduce the demand for corn, and lower corn prices.
Increased corn prices isn't good for areas where corn is a staple. That may not be a justification for eliminating the subsidy as higher prices would lead to more corn being grown.
In other words, the person making the decision within a company only has downsides for them. Many decisions are based around not doing something wrong.