I'll give you two great reasons why we should go up there.
1. Because Its the beginning of the fulfillment of thousands of years of humans wondering WTF is up there.
2. Because colonization of mars is the only thing (that we can do now) that significantly increases the chances for survival of the human race.
Yes the machine will simulate itself and the simulated machine will simulate the earth again with another machine on it which will simulate earth again this will go on infinitely. Shame the scientist missed this infinite loop it seemed like such a promising project.
I agree with you completely except for one point google is not throwing away money on wikimedia If wikimedia went down I (and hoards of other people) would have to find some other encyclopedia to use. It might not be so willing to let google index them. This is a serious investment by google in the form of a gift. As for ebay co-founder he probably loves and uses wikipedia a lot and just wanted to give for personal reasons. If I had more money I know I would give more.
If homosexually is genetic then by that same merit its also a biological imperfection and should be fixed (just as pedophilia and bestiality).
No. Doesn't follow. Homosexuals alter the balance of the sexes for reproductive purposes; they often provide a different and useful set of sensibilities to the community (Alan Turing, Isaac Newton, Plato, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Alan Turing, Francis Bacon, Henry David Thoreau...) If your thesis is that the only value proposition in the human race is that of reproduction, then you're just being silly. We're intelligent; we have our own uses for our fellows that go far beyond if they choose to breed or not.
Firstly your point of reproduction being the only proposition to humanity no but it could be the only proposition to marriage... but that's not my point nor do I believe that. Second could not pedophiles or bestiaphiles (I guess that's what you call them) offer similar things to humanity.
If it's a choice then you shouldn't tell people what to choose so long as their freedom to make that choice doesn't infringe on other peoples well-being or freedom.
And if their "biological imperfection" doesn't infringe on other people's well being or freedom, and the "imperfect" person is well satisfied? Einstein could be viewed, using your simplistic "not the same as the rest of us" criteria as being afflicted with a "biological imperfection"... would you have "fixed" him? Or Alan Turing? I mean, really. You need to think this over a little more comprehensively.
No because its not my point that we need to fix it my point is that that's not a reason to do anything. If we could control our genetics in such a way we could all have an IQ of 300 and wouldn't need to reproduce traditionally therefore there's no reason to modify law until its better understood.
The whole gay marriage debate is completely moronic on both sides.
Marriage, at present, is a state that alters access to health care, access to one's SO in the hospital, taxes and other issues. This is entirely aside from the warm and fuzzy feeling one might enjoy if "married" is a state one admires. Consequently, there are very practical reasons to seek (and not to seek) marriage. The obvious spit here is over the contractual and ritual components. Myself, I see no reason that marriage should provide any contractual elements at all. If you want the ritual and then choose to proclaim that the ritual means something to you, then by all means, have at it. If you want to enter into a contract with someone, you should do so. The mixing of the two is what makes marriage such a mess.
My point has nothing to do with the ritualistic or contractual. It's simply an (albeit unclear) attempt to show that both sides come to the wrong conclusion based upon bad premises. Whether gays should be allowed to marry in my opinion should be based on whether or the public wants it. If the public doesn't want it then they could be allowed the contractual part by calling it something else. The ritualistic parts are just about human interaction. Eventually once most people don't care we could just change it to be the same if it even matters then.
I'm chronically heterosexual, but I have to say that if there is a genetic imperfection that needs to be fixed, it is the genetic imperfection that produces offspring that equate homosexually with pedophilia and bestiality. The goat and the child cannot consent, but an adult male can, and if psychology is right those on that side of the debate are also often deathly afraid that they might. Furthermore, smoking crystal meth is a choice, at least the first time you do it, yet most people are perfectly OK with judging that behavior and saying it it morally wrong, even though they preach freedom of choice. Either the whole human race is moronic on every issue (and I admit an argument to that effect could be made), or these things are not as clear cut as you assert them to be.
A child as long as he/she could speak can consent and in theory a monkey could consent in sign language. The reason why Crystal Meth should remain illegal is because its fairly apparent that Crystal Meth is bad for the society as a whole. which infringes on both the freedom and well-being of other people. For the record IMHO we should allow homosexual Marriage as long as that's what the majority of society want (or not if they don't) because whether its a choice or genetic ATM is irrelevant.
The whole gay marriage debate is completely moronic on both sides. If homosexually is genetic then by that same merit its also a biological imperfection and should be fixed (just as pedophilia and bestiality). If it's a choice then you shouldn't tell people what to choose so long as their freedom to make that choice doesn't infringe on other peoples well-being or freedom.
The difference is generally speaking email systems don't block spam they just filter it and put it in a special folder. Not only that but spam filtering is something that users want and not something serving the agenda of the email provider.
Your argument collapses upon itself your saying there is no competition for Apple's OS (In terms of hardware). But Apple's Iphone has to compete with androids hardware (and software and price for that matter). So there is competition. If the problem becomes that people have different needs for hardware in a smartphone all Apple has to do is to change its strategy ever so slightly and make different grades of their phone. We haven't reached that point yet so apple hasn't tried to compete by making different hardware.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll give you two great reasons why we should go up there.
1. Because Its the beginning of the fulfillment of thousands of years of humans wondering WTF is up there.
2. Because colonization of mars is the only thing (that we can do now) that significantly increases the chances for survival of the human race.
Yes the machine will simulate itself and the simulated machine will simulate the earth again with another machine on it which will simulate earth again this will go on infinitely. Shame the scientist missed this infinite loop it seemed like such a promising project.
In soviet Russia GNU/Linux Choose you.
Alcohol: the cause of, and the solution to, all of life's problems.
Aah yes from one of my favorite books the Iliad.
This isn't surprising fido's always loved beer.
I'm not worried they'll come around once their molecules are made of photons.
Thanks for the nightmares.
I think you mean Yoo-hoo too close to delicious.
Or if you wanted to go open-source/cross-platform in a single plug-in you could use mplayer or vlc.
I agree with you completely except for one point google is not throwing away money on wikimedia If wikimedia went down I (and hoards of other people) would have to find some other encyclopedia to use. It might not be so willing to let google index them. This is a serious investment by google in the form of a gift. As for ebay co-founder he probably loves and uses wikipedia a lot and just wanted to give for personal reasons. If I had more money I know I would give more.
Yes
On a related note it seems the creators of the God Of War franchise are infringing on Omega's copyright.
or not if they don't
this link hint we should allow it because people want it. Next time have the courage to either mod me down or post not both.
No. Doesn't follow. Homosexuals alter the balance of the sexes for reproductive purposes; they often provide a different and useful set of sensibilities to the community (Alan Turing, Isaac Newton, Plato, Ludwig Wittgenstein, Alan Turing, Francis Bacon, Henry David Thoreau...) If your thesis is that the only value proposition in the human race is that of reproduction, then you're just being silly. We're intelligent; we have our own uses for our fellows that go far beyond if they choose to breed or not.
Firstly your point of reproduction being the only proposition to humanity no but it could be the only proposition to marriage... but that's not my point nor do I believe that. Second could not pedophiles or bestiaphiles (I guess that's what you call them) offer similar things to humanity.
And if their "biological imperfection" doesn't infringe on other people's well being or freedom, and the "imperfect" person is well satisfied? Einstein could be viewed, using your simplistic "not the same as the rest of us" criteria as being afflicted with a "biological imperfection"... would you have "fixed" him? Or Alan Turing? I mean, really. You need to think this over a little more comprehensively.
No because its not my point that we need to fix it my point is that that's not a reason to do anything. If we could control our genetics in such a way we could all have an IQ of 300 and wouldn't need to reproduce traditionally therefore there's no reason to modify law until its better understood.
Marriage, at present, is a state that alters access to health care, access to one's SO in the hospital, taxes and other issues. This is entirely aside from the warm and fuzzy feeling one might enjoy if "married" is a state one admires. Consequently, there are very practical reasons to seek (and not to seek) marriage. The obvious spit here is over the contractual and ritual components. Myself, I see no reason that marriage should provide any contractual elements at all. If you want the ritual and then choose to proclaim that the ritual means something to you, then by all means, have at it. If you want to enter into a contract with someone, you should do so. The mixing of the two is what makes marriage such a mess.
My point has nothing to do with the ritualistic or contractual. It's simply an (albeit unclear) attempt to show that both sides come to the wrong conclusion based upon bad premises. Whether gays should be allowed to marry in my opinion should be based on whether or the public wants it. If the public doesn't want it then they could be allowed the contractual part by calling it something else. The ritualistic parts are just about human interaction. Eventually once most people don't care we could just change it to be the same if it even matters then.
See wikipedia for Genetic disorders
I'm chronically heterosexual, but I have to say that if there is a genetic imperfection that needs to be fixed, it is the genetic imperfection that produces offspring that equate homosexually with pedophilia and bestiality. The goat and the child cannot consent, but an adult male can, and if psychology is right those on that side of the debate are also often deathly afraid that they might. Furthermore, smoking crystal meth is a choice, at least the first time you do it, yet most people are perfectly OK with judging that behavior and saying it it morally wrong, even though they preach freedom of choice. Either the whole human race is moronic on every issue (and I admit an argument to that effect could be made), or these things are not as clear cut as you assert them to be.
A child as long as he/she could speak can consent and in theory a monkey could consent in sign language. The reason why Crystal Meth should remain illegal is because its fairly apparent that Crystal Meth is bad for the society as a whole. which infringes on both the freedom and well-being of other people. For the record IMHO we should allow homosexual Marriage as long as that's what the majority of society want (or not if they don't) because whether its a choice or genetic ATM is irrelevant.
The whole gay marriage debate is completely moronic on both sides. If homosexually is genetic then by that same merit its also a biological imperfection and should be fixed (just as pedophilia and bestiality). If it's a choice then you shouldn't tell people what to choose so long as their freedom to make that choice doesn't infringe on other peoples well-being or freedom.
They could do it to Barack Obama too then at least he could be made in the U.S.A even if wasn't born in the U.S.A.
Honestly I don't care that much about getting faster mbps on my mobile device... does anybody know if they've fixed latency issues?
Real Cinnamon is rare and expensive, toxic chemicals usually aren't. Which do you think China's going to decide to use?
The one that consumers are willing to buy...
I don't understand can someone use a computer analogy to explain this instead of a car analogy.
The difference is generally speaking email systems don't block spam they just filter it and put it in a special folder. Not only that but spam filtering is something that users want and not something serving the agenda of the email provider.
Stop Uwe Boll Now. Don't wait until you or a loved one accidentally sees one of his movies.
Your argument collapses upon itself your saying there is no competition for Apple's OS (In terms of hardware). But Apple's Iphone has to compete with androids hardware (and software and price for that matter). So there is competition. If the problem becomes that people have different needs for hardware in a smartphone all Apple has to do is to change its strategy ever so slightly and make different grades of their phone. We haven't reached that point yet so apple hasn't tried to compete by making different hardware.
I think someone beat you to the Punch.