Exactly! My experience is that, in most cities, the IS world is a small town where everybody may not know everybody, but they know somebody who knows everybody. If you're going to leave, treat the people you're leaving (management) politely, and it will pay off later.
I read your definition of religion to be about how one viewed one's relationship, or what one believed one's relationship with a higher power to be
Which is really what I meant -- I guess I expressed myself poorly. I apologize.
- in which case, an atheist has no such relationship.
Or an athiest believes that he has no relationship. I would say that an athiest not believing in God does not stop God in any way from believing in him.
(Picture here, Dr. Teeth and the Electric Meyhem) "Even Santa Claus believes in you..."
If you're saying that it's what the relationship really is, then I find this to be a strange definition of religion.
That would imply that it is entirely possible for an individual to have any relationship with God that he/she likes, regardless of God's actual nature. I'm not entirely comfortable saying that.
In particular, what you say about it being an assumption that there is no relationship applies to anyone - how can anyone, be they Christians, Sikhs, Pagans, or some completely different religion, show that what they believe about their relationship with "the higher power" is correct?
I don't believe that it is scientifically possible -- that's one of the limitations of our understanding.
I believe that if the Divine (God/the Higher Power/Elvis/whatever -- I'm using "God" as shorthand above) is entirely within our comprehension, it's not the real Divine -- the whole point of the Divine/human split is that we're limited. Hence, we're all the blind men with the elephant here. Does that make any more sense, or am I arguing in circles?
But atheism is having no relationship with any higher power.
That assumes that this is possible, which is just as much an assumption (i.e. an unproven statement, scientifically speaking, and probably unprovable) as my belief that one exists.
No, religion is your relationship with the higher power. Non-belief is a relationship (albeit not exactly a close one), therefore being atheist is a religion.
Blaise Pascal (the Pascal that the language was named for, so yes, this is a "nerd post":-) asked centuries ago, "Are you better off if you act as if there is a God, whether or not there actually is?"
This question is generally called Pascal's Wager, and the answer he came to was, "Yes."
Of course, I am a bearded, long-haired Anglo male who looks much like the stereotypical Western representation of Jesus (who was a Middle-Eastern Jew according to the Bible I've read).
Not everybody who deserves to win wins -- the system's not perfect. O'Toole, for example, reportedly turned down an honorary Oscar (he's never won a Best Actor, despite being nominated 5 times or so and clearly deserving it) this year because he's still acting and wants a chance to win it outright.
Yes, they do, or, if you don't have a credit card, they'll take EFT info for a checking account. I had to set it up on a PC for temporay access for some folks at a convention last month.
Re:Smart Move for Ebay, bad for paypal people.
on
Ebay buys PayPal
·
· Score: 1
Exactly. What about the other merchants who accept PayPal?
My wife's online business, for example, accepts PayPal for people who don't have credit cards (they can do an EFT from a checking acct to PayPal, and PayPal EFT's to her). If this is no longer an attractive option, she's going to have to go to "credit cards only, or mail us a money order."
A fish and game warden comes upon a woman sitting along the river with a rod and reel.
He accuses her of fishing without a license, because she has the equipment.
She promptly accuses him of rape.
He's flabbergasted -- he's not even touched the woman.
The reply: "But you have the equipment."
Simply making a tool that people could use to violate Apple's trademarks/copyrights/IP and that has other uses is a reasonable thing to do, and, if Apple were reasonable, would not be a problem any more than IE, which allows you to copy Apple's graphics from their website and do with them what you will. I do notice that Apple's not suing Microsoft...
So, they'll limit the quality of what can be recorded on a WinXP machine. But they're not talking about limiting the quality of what can be played on a WinXP machine, or, indeed, any OS.
So, those who are recording MP3's simply don't use Windows XP to do it. Use Windows 98. Use a Mac (which, in its current TV ads, is encouraging people to record music CD's). Use Linux/Solaris/whatever.
I really don't think that this is going to have a big effect on music piracy here -- I think it will let Microsoft say they tried.
Whether professional or amateur (a proud term, originally meaning someone who does something for the love of it), we're the people who are making this possible.
According to NPR yesterday, the PC's are a required part of the new Ford contract with the UAW, and the UAW is hoping to get Daimler-Chrysler to follow suit when its contract comes up for discussion. The article indicated that the PC's were the union's idea, not Ford's.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly! My experience is that, in most cities, the IS world is a small town where everybody may not know everybody, but they know somebody who knows everybody.
If you're going to leave, treat the people you're leaving (management) politely, and it will pay off later.
I read your definition of religion to be about how one viewed one's relationship, or what one believed one's relationship with a higher power to be
Which is really what I meant -- I guess I expressed myself poorly. I apologize.
- in which case, an atheist has no such relationship.
Or an athiest believes that he has no relationship. I would say that an athiest not believing in God does not stop God in any way from believing in him.
(Picture here, Dr. Teeth and the Electric Meyhem) "Even Santa Claus believes in you..."
If you're saying that it's what the relationship really is, then I find this to be a strange definition of religion.
That would imply that it is entirely possible for an individual to have any relationship with God that he/she likes, regardless of God's actual nature. I'm not entirely comfortable saying that.
In particular, what you say about it being an assumption that there is no relationship applies to anyone - how can anyone, be they Christians, Sikhs, Pagans, or some completely different religion, show that what they believe about their relationship with "the higher power" is correct?
I don't believe that it is scientifically possible -- that's one of the limitations of our understanding.
I believe that if the Divine (God/the Higher Power/Elvis/whatever -- I'm using "God" as shorthand above) is entirely within our comprehension, it's not the real Divine -- the whole point of the Divine/human split is that we're limited. Hence, we're all the blind men with the elephant here. Does that make any more sense, or am I arguing in circles?
I sit corrected.
Uncomfortable with the mental images here, but corrected.
Then again, I've had it explained to me that many people, when they first heard the name Pokemon, assumed it was a Japanese gay bar...
There has got to be prior art on this. Didn't Yahoo do this before 2000 (when the patent was filed)?
But atheism is having no relationship with any higher power.
That assumes that this is possible, which is just as much an assumption (i.e. an unproven statement, scientifically speaking, and probably unprovable) as my belief that one exists.
No, religion is your relationship with the higher power. Non-belief is a relationship (albeit not exactly a close one), therefore being atheist is a religion.
Blaise Pascal (the Pascal that the language was named for, so yes, this is a "nerd post" :-) asked centuries ago, "Are you better off if you act as if there is a God, whether or not there actually is?"
This question is generally called Pascal's Wager, and the answer he came to was, "Yes."
-Dejaffa
Actually, I tend to respond as if addressed.
"No, though others have thought so."
Of course, I am a bearded, long-haired Anglo male who looks much like the stereotypical Western representation of Jesus (who was a Middle-Eastern Jew according to the Bible I've read).
Dejaffa
OK, you're a freak. ...
but you're right...
No way -- passing _that_ would be way too painful.
Not everybody who deserves to win wins -- the system's not perfect. O'Toole, for example, reportedly turned down an honorary Oscar (he's never won a Best Actor, despite being nominated 5 times or so and clearly deserving it) this year because he's still acting and wants a chance to win it outright.
Or James Earl Jones -- the deepness of that voice would be even better, IMHO. YMMV.
Localization and language support are going to be an issue here.
Yes, they do, or, if you don't have a credit card, they'll take EFT info for a checking account.
I had to set it up on a PC for temporay access for some folks at a convention last month.
Exactly. What about the other merchants who accept PayPal?
My wife's online business, for example, accepts PayPal for people who don't have credit cards (they can do an EFT from a checking acct to PayPal, and PayPal EFT's to her). If this is no longer an attractive option, she's going to have to go to "credit cards only, or mail us a money order."
For us, this is A Bad Thing(tm).
Dejaffa
dbrowne at sewingcentral . com
That subordinate clause was added by Congress in 1954, so removing it would be just going back to the original version. :-)
A fish and game warden comes upon a woman sitting along the river with a rod and reel.
He accuses her of fishing without a license, because she has the equipment.
She promptly accuses him of rape.
He's flabbergasted -- he's not even touched the woman.
The reply: "But you have the equipment."
Simply making a tool that people could use to violate Apple's trademarks/copyrights/IP and that has other uses is a reasonable thing to do, and, if Apple were reasonable, would not be a problem any more than IE, which allows you to copy Apple's graphics from their website and do with them what you will. I do notice that Apple's not suing Microsoft...
Dejaffa
So, they'll limit the quality of what can be recorded on a WinXP machine. But they're not talking about limiting the quality of what can be played on a WinXP machine, or, indeed, any OS.
So, those who are recording MP3's simply don't use Windows XP to do it. Use Windows 98. Use a Mac (which, in its current TV ads, is encouraging people to record music CD's). Use Linux/Solaris/whatever.
I really don't think that this is going to have a big effect on music piracy here -- I think it will let Microsoft say they tried.
Dejaffa
We're the "technology people," the geeks.
Whether professional or amateur (a proud term, originally meaning someone who does something for the love of it), we're the people who are making this possible.
So, what are we going to do about it?
http://www.foxnews.com/vtech/020400/d elta.sml.
Reportedly, Delta Airlines will announce this afternoon that they're doing the same thing.
According to NPR yesterday, the PC's are a required part of the new Ford contract with the UAW, and the UAW is hoping to get Daimler-Chrysler to follow suit when its contract comes up for discussion. The article indicated that the PC's were the union's idea, not Ford's.