Before we could just open the drives and smash the platters if you wanted to be really paranoid Couldn't one just take a hammer/woodchipper to the new SSDs? Sure, you might be able to get some data off the drive. But the same would be true about a hard drive. If someone wanted to (already has?) invent a drive reader for a smashed up Solid State or Disk Platter drive, I'd bet that they could given enough time/money.
I bet your right in more than a few cases. But I find it hard to believe that only a handful of people have noticed that the 3rd world has potential for making money (aside from exploitation). I think its far more likely that the risk/reward ratio is too out of whack to be worth it.
It isn't universal. Only people with they money need to suffer, and in that it only means that they can't afford a trip to Hawaii every winter along with the Porche in the driveway.
What I mean by suffering (and I should have been more clear) is that those with money would not spend so much money on themselves. If you are used to spending money on yourself then it is painful to stop and give it away. I did not mean that everyone needs to live in a pit of squalor for the sake of 3rd world countries.
Capitalism isn't the problem per se. Ignorance and lack of forethough[sic] is the problem. The people at the top of businesses are not stupid. You don't become millionaire business (wo)man without either forethought or underlings who have forethought.
I think it is far more likely that the people with the money have not seen a viable option for them to invest in, in which they can expect a reasonable return. I'm no economic expert, but if it made definably good business sense to invest in 3rd world countries then someone would have done it by now. But instead every time we hear of a rich business(wo)man investing in a 3rd world country it is called philanthropy.
Capitalism suffers from the same problem as Communism and Anarchy. In order for it to work, people need to not be jerks.
The problem with solving poverty is that it costs money; investing money in things that will give no return is bad business. Unless we are willing to sacrifice things will never change. Even then it will be hard because there will not be an overnight change. It will take time and energy.
We CAN make poverty history. We just have to be willing to pay the price and suffer for no other reason than it is the right thing to do.
Actually, a friend of mine who used to work for Nortel and now for Alcaltel-Lucent (the division he works in was bought) told me that the only limit on bandwidth along fibre is our ability to separate the individual signals traveling along the fibre. After that, the next limitation is the speed of light.
For example, the record for data transfer is 26.5 TB/s.
From the Article:
[T]hey developed monkey kidney cells which contained the protein needed. Developed enough such that our kidneys are immune?
Do any other parts of the human body make the protein needed for the virus' reproduction?
I hope this strain is adequately tested before it is labeled as safe.
A lot of the evangelists will go on and on about homosexuality, even though it's not even mentioned in the New Testament, and the old testament has more to say about the evil of pork than homosexuality. Wrong.
1 Corinthians 6:9 New International Version (NIV)
Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders. And the old testament puts homosexual activity in with sacrificing your children to Baal. I'd say thats pretty bad.
I'll accept that if Christians stop telling me I'm going to hell for, apparently, being what god wants me to be. Unfortunately, that's classic Extreme Calvinism. To say that God wants you to be an atheist makes no sense at all. Why would God want you to believe something that isn't true? We have to choose to live for God, how can we love God without it being a choice? If love is forced it ceases to be love, no matter how we "feel" about it. To say that God is "making" someone be an atheist is essentially denying free will which is intrinsic to Christianity. How could anyone go to Hell for something God does? It isn't their fault.
God wants everyone to believe in Him and be with Him in Heaven... if one ends up in Hell its one's own choice. Hell doesn't exist because God, in His wrath, wants to punish the wicked. It exists because we, in our infinite stupidity (self included) constantly turn away from God. Hell is simply the finality of our choices here on Earth. If we choose to live a life of sin and debauchery then we will spend our eternity living with that choice.
That said, there is an interesting poem by Robert Service (a famous Canadian poet) who wrote a poem called Barb-Wire Bill which goes well with this verse from scripture (trust me, it isn't preachy).
Because of this verse, many atheists will be in Heaven and many Christians in Hell. I think, anyway...
I would say that the thought that university is greater than college is a fallacy when it comes to CS. I think it has more to do with the program offered than the piece of paper that you get at the end, aside from making money perhaps.
I am currently attending Algonquin College in Ottawa, Ontario. Many people have left Carleton University (also in Ottawa) to come to Algonquin because they felt the program was better at Algonquin. I don't know if it is true, but I do know that after three semesters I have learned at least the basics of 9 languages/scripts, including C/C++ and M68000 Assembler. On top of that, I am currently working in the field through a coop program adn getting paid to test scanners. A friend of mine is working on HD-Video Switch boards programming in assembly (he has the better deal).
So I say that one should choose to go to the school that offers the better program to suite his or her needs, unless all he/she cares about is money... then go to university.
Rebutting religion? Easy as hell : "THERE IS NO BEARDED GUY WITH A SIN LIST ABOVE" How is that a rebuttal? A rebuttal is a logical argument refuting another statement. What you said is simply a contradictory statement.
For instance, to rebut you by your logic I would say, quote: "Yes there is."
Some food for thought:
Many laws in Leviticus became somewhat moot after Christ was crucified and resurrected. For instance, animal sacrifices are not necessary because we have the perfect sacrifice to offer in Jesus Christ, namely in the Eucharist (I am Catholic) which is the one and same sacrifice at Calvary, not a repetition of the Crucifixion. However, that being said, my knowledge of Pentateuchal Law is somewhat lacking, so I won't say that similar things are true for all the laws.
Slashdot Mirror
I bet your right in more than a few cases. But I find it hard to believe that only a handful of people have noticed that the 3rd world has potential for making money (aside from exploitation). I think its far more likely that the risk/reward ratio is too out of whack to be worth it.
It isn't universal. Only people with they money need to suffer, and in that it only means that they can't afford a trip to Hawaii every winter along with the Porche in the driveway.
What I mean by suffering (and I should have been more clear) is that those with money would not spend so much money on themselves. If you are used to spending money on yourself then it is painful to stop and give it away. I did not mean that everyone needs to live in a pit of squalor for the sake of 3rd world countries.
I think it is far more likely that the people with the money have not seen a viable option for them to invest in, in which they can expect a reasonable return. I'm no economic expert, but if it made definably good business sense to invest in 3rd world countries then someone would have done it by now. But instead every time we hear of a rich business(wo)man investing in a 3rd world country it is called philanthropy.
Capitalism suffers from the same problem as Communism and Anarchy. In order for it to work, people need to not be jerks.
The problem with solving poverty is that it costs money; investing money in things that will give no return is bad business. Unless we are willing to sacrifice things will never change. Even then it will be hard because there will not be an overnight change. It will take time and energy.
We CAN make poverty history. We just have to be willing to pay the price and suffer for no other reason than it is the right thing to do.
Actually, a friend of mine who used to work for Nortel and now for Alcaltel-Lucent (the division he works in was bought) told me that the only limit on bandwidth along fibre is our ability to separate the individual signals traveling along the fibre. After that, the next limitation is the speed of light.
For example, the record for data transfer is 26.5 TB/s.
Touché.
Do any other parts of the human body make the protein needed for the virus' reproduction?
I hope this strain is adequately tested before it is labeled as safe.
1 Corinthians 6:9 New International Version (NIV) Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders. And the old testament puts homosexual activity in with sacrificing your children to Baal. I'd say thats pretty bad.
God wants everyone to believe in Him and be with Him in Heaven... if one ends up in Hell its one's own choice. Hell doesn't exist because God, in His wrath, wants to punish the wicked. It exists because we, in our infinite stupidity (self included) constantly turn away from God. Hell is simply the finality of our choices here on Earth. If we choose to live a life of sin and debauchery then we will spend our eternity living with that choice.
That said, there is an interesting poem by Robert Service (a famous Canadian poet) who wrote a poem called Barb-Wire Bill which goes well with this verse from scripture (trust me, it isn't preachy).
Because of this verse, many atheists will be in Heaven and many Christians in Hell. I think, anyway...
I would say that the thought that university is greater than college is a fallacy when it comes to CS. I think it has more to do with the program offered than the piece of paper that you get at the end, aside from making money perhaps.
I am currently attending Algonquin College in Ottawa, Ontario. Many people have left Carleton University (also in Ottawa) to come to Algonquin because they felt the program was better at Algonquin. I don't know if it is true, but I do know that after three semesters I have learned at least the basics of 9 languages/scripts, including C/C++ and M68000 Assembler. On top of that, I am currently working in the field through a coop program adn getting paid to test scanners. A friend of mine is working on HD-Video Switch boards programming in assembly (he has the better deal).
So I say that one should choose to go to the school that offers the better program to suite his or her needs, unless all he/she cares about is money... then go to university.
For instance, to rebut you by your logic I would say, quote: "Yes there is."
Some food for thought: Many laws in Leviticus became somewhat moot after Christ was crucified and resurrected. For instance, animal sacrifices are not necessary because we have the perfect sacrifice to offer in Jesus Christ, namely in the Eucharist (I am Catholic) which is the one and same sacrifice at Calvary, not a repetition of the Crucifixion. However, that being said, my knowledge of Pentateuchal Law is somewhat lacking, so I won't say that similar things are true for all the laws.