By the way, how the hell can you revoke your ID card? Dying? It's not like your ID card has a number other than your real ID number (at least here in Spain), so there's really no way of saying "this one is old and revoked while this one is the new one".
You all just missed the point that one of them is a touchscreen while the other isn't. Making one huge screen's right half touch-sensitive while the other isn't? Don't think so.
From what I understand after reading the article, he ruled that software patents are to be reviewed for "methods" of doing something. In other words, it's still impossible to patent the double click in the UK, and only patent things like "manufacture something using a computer as the control unit".
Still, I think the UK "wouldn't" be allowed to give out software patents if the European Parliament says not to do so.
And yes, I do believe this judge is horribly wrong, but it's not too bad anyway.
I wasn't trying to refute anything. You are free to believe in anything you want, even in 1st college course fallacies.
You say we wouldn't be able to trust our senses if causality didn't exist. Well, we can trust them as to explain what our own senses tell us. Of course, the whole world could be a simulation and our senses could deceive us, but they would deceive us in a "constant" manner as repeated observations of the same phenomena turn out to be the same (or, in the cases that they differ, they do in an explainable way).
That was my point. I said "someone's theory of X isn't right", not "X must not exist or is not a valid idea". And yes, I did imply that it's not right because it's so old, and because in these 2300 years (except maybe the Dark Age) new explanations for "everything" (as Aristotle's theories tried to explain how the whole universe worked) have appeared, with much more sense, and much more correctness than that of Aristotle.
Funny how you didn't even try to support Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways. If you can also see the fallacies in each of the logical arguments, why try to use that as "proof" in Slashdot? (full of people who could find the fallacies pretty easily)
Of course, msuarezalvarez is right about both points, and, in fact, those 2 points can be used to debunk 3 or 4 of the Five Ways.
Aristotle's first cause argument is more than 2300 years old. If you're as rational as you seem to want others to be, we should still believe in 4 elements and a plain Earth. In fact, Aristotle's argument was based on his whole theory of causality, which is not necessarily true. In fact, nobody today follows that because we have *BLING BLING* SCIENCE! *BLING BLING* (ancient Greek philosophy is not science, sorry)
Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways are... well, not so old, only 500 years. Let's see an example of what they look like:
Santa Claus can fly.
Santa Claus gives you presents if you're good.
Santa Claus is different from normal people.
Santa Claus doesn't change his suit from year to year.
Santa Claus wears red.
There, I listed 5 things about Santa. Does he exist now?
Basically, we need to convert the list of words into a list of numbers (input of the function). Cheating is useless here, as the correct result will be based on the function we "coded" during the steps.
The title suggests: "list, uniquify, relativity".
I think that means the first input must be a words position in the list, or so (getting the words from the Ford quote).
Just my two cents before I go out, get drunk and forget about this whole thing.
Slashdot Mirror
By the way, how the hell can you revoke your ID card? Dying? It's not like your ID card has a number other than your real ID number (at least here in Spain), so there's really no way of saying "this one is old and revoked while this one is the new one".
1. That's why the whole biometric ID stuff is flawed.
2. That's a hypothetical situation, sorry.
Let's say you lose your ID card. Someone else could take it and fake that he/she is you. Are you guilty of anything?
You all just missed the point that one of them is a touchscreen while the other isn't. Making one huge screen's right half touch-sensitive while the other isn't? Don't think so.
When I read the title I just thought: "Oh, God, don't tell me this is some kind of One Laptop Per Country initiative"
A nihilist believes there are no reasons for anything. But that doesn't mean the keyboard I'm typing on doesn't exist.
:P
I know, I know, you meant "NOTHING" as a "nothing higher than physical existance", but hey, it wasn't clear
This has to be the biggest case of WHOOOSH I've seen in a while. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism And you got nihilism wrong too.
What does nihilism have to do with atheism or religion?
And what the hell is a gnostic? Someone who knows for certain there IS a God? (brought to you by the "Lern Too Spell Comizzin")
So blame the developer because the almighty Gods of so-called promised retro-compatibility have screwed up their own work?
16 databases, 16 schemas. SHITLOAD = 16?
Photosynth needs multiple photographs taken from different angles.
Wooooosh... (it's not a joke, but still, that was the analogy passing over your head and waving your sanity goodbye)
From what I understand after reading the article, he ruled that software patents are to be reviewed for "methods" of doing something. In other words, it's still impossible to patent the double click in the UK, and only patent things like "manufacture something using a computer as the control unit".
Still, I think the UK "wouldn't" be allowed to give out software patents if the European Parliament says not to do so.
And yes, I do believe this judge is horribly wrong, but it's not too bad anyway.
I wasn't trying to refute anything. You are free to believe in anything you want, even in 1st college course fallacies.
You say we wouldn't be able to trust our senses if causality didn't exist. Well, we can trust them as to explain what our own senses tell us. Of course, the whole world could be a simulation and our senses could deceive us, but they would deceive us in a "constant" manner as repeated observations of the same phenomena turn out to be the same (or, in the cases that they differ, they do in an explainable way).
Have fun believing in 13th century "science".
That was my point. I said "someone's theory of X isn't right", not "X must not exist or is not a valid idea". And yes, I did imply that it's not right because it's so old, and because in these 2300 years (except maybe the Dark Age) new explanations for "everything" (as Aristotle's theories tried to explain how the whole universe worked) have appeared, with much more sense, and much more correctness than that of Aristotle.
Funny how you didn't even try to support Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways. If you can also see the fallacies in each of the logical arguments, why try to use that as "proof" in Slashdot? (full of people who could find the fallacies pretty easily)
Of course, msuarezalvarez is right about both points, and, in fact, those 2 points can be used to debunk 3 or 4 of the Five Ways.
Aristotle's first cause argument is more than 2300 years old. If you're as rational as you seem to want others to be, we should still believe in 4 elements and a plain Earth. In fact, Aristotle's argument was based on his whole theory of causality, which is not necessarily true. In fact, nobody today follows that because we have *BLING BLING* SCIENCE! *BLING BLING* (ancient Greek philosophy is not science, sorry) Thomas Aquinas' Five Ways are... well, not so old, only 500 years. Let's see an example of what they look like: Santa Claus can fly. Santa Claus gives you presents if you're good. Santa Claus is different from normal people. Santa Claus doesn't change his suit from year to year. Santa Claus wears red. There, I listed 5 things about Santa. Does he exist now?
Basically, we need to convert the list of words into a list of numbers (input of the function). Cheating is useless here, as the correct result will be based on the function we "coded" during the steps.
The title suggests: "list, uniquify, relativity".
I think that means the first input must be a words position in the list, or so (getting the words from the Ford quote).
Just my two cents before I go out, get drunk and forget about this whole thing.
01/18/2008 discover the meaning of the date Copied from the site.