Um, Forest Gump was a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay betterm ovie than either the Shaw Shank Redemption or Pulp Fiction. Not saying those movies were bad, just thought Forest Gump was better.
None of these campaign plans EVER go through. If they get elected they then have to compromise on the plans with congress, so what they say now is really irrelevant. What I think is important in voting is idealogy and integrity. The reason why I will not be voting for Al Gore is integrity. I watched two of the democratic debates and some of the tactics he used were really quite pathetic. On the republican side, I'm not sure which of the candidates I like the best, but I know that Keyes definetely sounds the most pissed off, which in itself, is good.
I don't know if this help, but usually by possiblity (in the philosophical sense), logical possibility is meant. My philosophy professor gave this example which I think is pretty helpful: If We have three Sets: A: World Facts B: Laws of Physics C: Logic A is a subset of B. B is a subset of C. Therfore, all 'possible' worlds must be elements of C. So for example, the laws of physics do not permit me to travel faster than the speed of light, but no logical contradiction occurs if I travel faster than the speed of light, so it is 'possible' that a world can exist where they can travel faster than the speed of light. If we define bachelor as an unmarried man. Then it is not possible for a world to exist where bachelors are married since this creates a contradiction and thus is not logically possible. Saint Anslem's Proslogium (sp) gives a pretty good argument (imo) of the reason why God has to logically exist. Since the non-existance of god is logically impossible, then he has to exist in this world since this world is an element of C.
Actually, I think (sp) proof of God's existance is pretty compelling (logical proof). My hardcore athiest philosophy proffesor thoroughly dismantled the attempted proofs of Actually I think Saint Anslem's proof of God's existnace is logically compelling. My hardcore athiest philosophy proffessor thoroughly dismanteled the attempted proofs of God's existance by Palay and Saint Aquinas, however his arguments against Anslem's proof were _really_ weak.
No, its not a nitpick. Occam's Razor can't really be applied because there is no real way to subjectively quanitfy which of the two possible outcomes are simpler. Everyone had the idea of 'nothing', but it wasn't till an arab explicitly brought it over (from the hindus) that 0 was really understood. The same can be said for Occam's Razor.
Don't blame your ignorance on RedHat. I'm not sure about the GUI installer, but the text-based installer definetely gives you a choice. As for the X problems, perhaps you should `man X`. The problem is again your OWN. X's authentication protocol is either based on allowed hosts or a cookie system. `man xhost`, `man xauth`.
UH very few drug users get thrown in jails. We wouldn't have space even if we wanted to throw them in (which I think is good, its better they get treatement than to throw them in jail). I don't think society ostracizes drug users, I think the exact oppossitte is true. There are so many damn ways for drug (ab)users to seek treatment its ridiculous. This whole ostraiciziation bs is just an excuse for continuing usage and for their predicament.
The point is they don't produce any of it. They PERFORM. The dance is choriographed (sp) by choriographers (sp). The songs are written by other people. The music is written and performed by others. They are strictly involved in performing. I guess you could consider their idiosyncratic styles art, however, I think that would be a strech. I'm not belitteling the importance of performance, I'm just saying they aren't artists.
Since they do not compose any of their own music (at least to my knowledge) they are not artists. They are performers though. Some might even consider them entertainers (although I don't:).
... how copying an mp3 is different from stealing? If I walk into a car dealership and drop off $5000 (to pay for cost the raw materials that compose the car) for a car and drive off with a $80,000 car, is this not wrong? How is copying an mp3 any different? Theoretically I don't even have to drop the $5000 because the cost of the raw materials is arbitrarily assigned, and in my opinion those materials are abundant and can be easily found, thus they should cost nothing, thus the price of the car is nothing.
Yes, I know the history of the statement. I know some introductory level college biology/chemistry/psychology also. I rather not get into an argument over the statemnt because most people believe that statement in an egaltarian sense. I don't understand why these racisits don't go start their own country and create strict immigration laws. Oh wait, I do know why, but I'm sure the racisits already figured this out too (at least the ones that have some semblance of logical capabilities). That is why they are still here nagging us. So to be frank and out of sincere curiosity, INSTEAD of irritating 95%+ of the population, why the hell don't the racisits just get up, move, and start their own nation?
... If it only takes NASA 18 hours to proccess the signals and they have a limited number of signals to process, why the hell would they go through the trouble of setting up and coordinating a massive distributed effort? And people wonder where the money goes heh...
Well not to be blunt, but I generally view racisits as ignorant, stubborn, and immoral. These are the defining traits of racisim IMHO. None of these traits (according to my set of ethics/morality) is desirable. Thus, I view racists as degraded people. The general reasons used to support racisim are culture-degredation (an absolutely horrific argument, even an elementary school student could demolish this one), oppression (another really weak argument), and psuedo-science (the name says it all). I would be interrested in which of the following reasons you hold your views for..
You do know that Allah is the arabic word for god right? You do know islam belives in the same god as judiasm and christianity right? I hate it when people say acts are committed in the name of 'Allah' (in America), when they really ought to say that the acts were commited in the name of GOD. Or they could report the whole incident in Arabic. Whichever they prefer. But do one or the either, dont mix in enlgish with Arabic. This definetely seems like a racist action by many media outlets.
The difference you seem to not understand is that America FESSES up. We know we do these things, we document them, and we teach them in our schools (at least now we do). The Japanese don't do any of the above. That is a significant difference. At least we _know_.
The statement 'murder is wrong' is also an opinion. However almost all of us agree that this is true. In a same manner all of us agree that racisim is wrong. I don't think it would be to far of a strech to equate the mentality of a killer with the mentality of a racisit...
If they want to, they can live with white people only in another country. This country is based on the fact taht 'All Men are Created Equal'. That is what the general population belives. If racisits don't like this view, they are free to leave and start their own nation. I actually am waiting for them to buy some little island nation and then all move their so they can protect their sacred 'culture'. I'm sure that endeavor will last *REAL* long. I'm sure the culture they are protecting will be quite rich. I just want to see them put their god damn money where their god damn mouth is. America isn't going to change, so why the fuck don't you bigots get out and start your own country!@? Or do the smarter of you already know the outcome...
Actually the UN does documment most of this stuff, its just that most of the member nations don't really give a fuck. Go to un.org and check out resolutions passed and the thousands of reports filed to the general and security councils.
nd for those that aren't quite sure if we are brainwashed, do yourselves a favor and try to learn things our schools didn't want to teach us. Edison did not invent the light bulb. Fulton did not invent the steamboat. Columbus was not the first European to see the New World... etc.
This is a nitpick, but the above things really aren't independant thought. They are just erroneous facts. I just graduated from highschool, and we learned that the Vikings were the first (euro's) to travel to the continent. However for all practical purpose, it was Columbus's rediscovery 500 years later that led to the formation of our Country. He didn't even land on any part associated with America if I remeber correctly. I belive America Vesitigo (probably not his real name, but its close to it:) was the first to actually rediscover America (after the vikings that is).
I just garduated from hs (last year), and my general impression was the emphasis was more on concepts and less on memorization of facts (although that still did play a prominent role). It appears that they are actually starting to teach you how to _think_ and not just regurgitate in public schools now a day (at least mine did).
Slashdot Mirror
Um, Forest Gump was a waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay betterm ovie than either the Shaw Shank Redemption or Pulp Fiction. Not saying those movies were bad, just thought Forest Gump was better.
None of these campaign plans EVER go through. If they get elected they then have to compromise on the plans with congress, so what they say now is really irrelevant. What I think is important in voting is idealogy and integrity. The reason why I will not be voting for Al Gore is integrity. I watched two of the democratic debates and some of the tactics he used were really quite pathetic. On the republican side, I'm not sure which of the candidates I like the best, but I know that Keyes definetely sounds the most pissed off, which in itself, is good.
I don't know if this help, but usually by possiblity (in the philosophical sense), logical possibility is meant. My philosophy professor gave this example which I think is pretty helpful: If We have three Sets: A: World Facts B: Laws of Physics C: Logic A is a subset of B. B is a subset of C. Therfore, all 'possible' worlds must be elements of C. So for example, the laws of physics do not permit me to travel faster than the speed of light, but no logical contradiction occurs if I travel faster than the speed of light, so it is 'possible' that a world can exist where they can travel faster than the speed of light. If we define bachelor as an unmarried man. Then it is not possible for a world to exist where bachelors are married since this creates a contradiction and thus is not logically possible. Saint Anslem's Proslogium (sp) gives a pretty good argument (imo) of the reason why God has to logically exist. Since the non-existance of god is logically impossible, then he has to exist in this world since this world is an element of C.
after I think, is suppose to be Saint Anslem.
Actually, I think (sp) proof of God's existance is pretty compelling (logical proof). My hardcore athiest philosophy proffesor thoroughly dismantled the attempted proofs of Actually I think Saint Anslem's proof of God's existnace is logically compelling. My hardcore athiest philosophy proffessor thoroughly dismanteled the attempted proofs of God's existance by Palay and Saint Aquinas, however his arguments against Anslem's proof were _really_ weak.
No, its not a nitpick. Occam's Razor can't really be applied because there is no real way to subjectively quanitfy which of the two possible outcomes are simpler. Everyone had the idea of 'nothing', but it wasn't till an arab explicitly brought it over (from the hindus) that 0 was really understood. The same can be said for Occam's Razor.
Don't blame your ignorance on RedHat. I'm not sure about the GUI installer, but the text-based installer definetely gives you a choice. As for the X problems, perhaps you should `man X`. The problem is again your OWN. X's authentication protocol is either based on allowed hosts or a cookie system. `man xhost`, `man xauth`.
UH very few drug users get thrown in jails. We wouldn't have space even if we wanted to throw them in (which I think is good, its better they get treatement than to throw them in jail). I don't think society ostracizes drug users, I think the exact oppossitte is true. There are so many damn ways for drug (ab)users to seek treatment its ridiculous. This whole ostraiciziation bs is just an excuse for continuing usage and for their predicament.
stuff blew up in GI Joe, but no one ever really died. Also, they always had the lesson of the day at the end.
They released a ViaVoice sdk a while ago, look on there page, its somewhere there.
The copying model has no method of compensation for labor. Thus, labor in your counter-example doesn't matter. Labor is free in the copying model.
The point is they don't produce any of it. They PERFORM. The dance is choriographed (sp) by choriographers (sp). The songs are written by other people. The music is written and performed by others. They are strictly involved in performing. I guess you could consider their idiosyncratic styles art, however, I think that would be a strech. I'm not belitteling the importance of performance, I'm just saying they aren't artists.
Since they do not compose any of their own music (at least to my knowledge) they are not artists. They are performers though. Some might even consider them entertainers (although I don't :).
They still have the information to build the car. They just have to assemble it. (Remeber in the copying scheme we have labor == $0).
... how copying an mp3 is different from stealing? If I walk into a car dealership and drop off $5000 (to pay for cost the raw materials that compose the car) for a car and drive off with a $80,000 car, is this not wrong? How is copying an mp3 any different? Theoretically I don't even have to drop the $5000 because the cost of the raw materials is arbitrarily assigned, and in my opinion those materials are abundant and can be easily found, thus they should cost nothing, thus the price of the car is nothing.
Yes, I know the history of the statement. I know some introductory level college biology/chemistry/psychology also. I rather not get into an argument over the statemnt because most people believe that statement in an egaltarian sense. I don't understand why these racisits don't go start their own country and create strict immigration laws. Oh wait, I do know why, but I'm sure the racisits already figured this out too (at least the ones that have some semblance of logical capabilities). That is why they are still here nagging us. So to be frank and out of sincere curiosity, INSTEAD of irritating 95%+ of the population, why the hell don't the racisits just get up, move, and start their own nation?
... If it only takes NASA 18 hours to proccess the signals and they have a limited number of signals to process, why the hell would they go through the trouble of setting up and coordinating a massive distributed effort? And people wonder where the money goes heh...
Well not to be blunt, but I generally view racisits as ignorant, stubborn, and immoral. These are the defining traits of racisim IMHO. None of these traits (according to my set of ethics/morality) is desirable. Thus, I view racists as degraded people. The general reasons used to support racisim are culture-degredation (an absolutely horrific argument, even an elementary school student could demolish this one), oppression (another really weak argument), and psuedo-science (the name says it all). I would be interrested in which of the following reasons you hold your views for..
Read the Salon article posted higher up in this thread. He held some socialist ideas. He was NOT a communist.
You do know that Allah is the arabic word for god right? You do know islam belives in the same god as judiasm and christianity right? I hate it when people say acts are committed in the name of 'Allah' (in America), when they really ought to say that the acts were commited in the name of GOD. Or they could report the whole incident in Arabic. Whichever they prefer. But do one or the either, dont mix in enlgish with Arabic. This definetely seems like a racist action by many media outlets.
The difference you seem to not understand is that America FESSES up. We know we do these things, we document them, and we teach them in our schools (at least now we do). The Japanese don't do any of the above. That is a significant difference. At least we _know_.
The statement 'murder is wrong' is also an opinion. However almost all of us agree that this is true. In a same manner all of us agree that racisim is wrong. I don't think it would be to far of a strech to equate the mentality of a killer with the mentality of a racisit...
If they want to, they can live with white people only in another country. This country is based on the fact taht 'All Men are Created Equal'. That is what the general population belives. If racisits don't like this view, they are free to leave and start their own nation. I actually am waiting for them to buy some little island nation and then all move their so they can protect their sacred 'culture'. I'm sure that endeavor will last *REAL* long. I'm sure the culture they are protecting will be quite rich. I just want to see them put their god damn money where their god damn mouth is. America isn't going to change, so why the fuck don't you bigots get out and start your own country!@? Or do the smarter of you already know the outcome...
Actually the UN does documment most of this stuff, its just that most of the member nations don't really give a fuck. Go to un.org and check out resolutions passed and the thousands of reports filed to the general and security councils.
This is a nitpick, but the above things really aren't independant thought. They are just erroneous facts. I just graduated from highschool, and we learned that the Vikings were the first (euro's) to travel to the continent. However for all practical purpose, it was Columbus's rediscovery 500 years later that led to the formation of our Country. He didn't even land on any part associated with America if I remeber correctly. I belive America Vesitigo (probably not his real name, but its close to it :) was the first to actually rediscover America (after the vikings that is).
I just garduated from hs (last year), and my general impression was the emphasis was more on concepts and less on memorization of facts (although that still did play a prominent role). It appears that they are actually starting to teach you how to _think_ and not just regurgitate in public schools now a day (at least mine did).