I fully sympathise with this viewpoint. Occasionally there will be someone playing a game on their laptop during lectures on my course (physics), and it is incredibly distracting. It's a challenge to concentrate on the quantum mechanics lecture being delivered when you have someone playing GTA in your eyeline, and these people should be shot. However, the number of people using their laptops for this is statistically insignificant when compared to the number of people using their computers for note taking or supplementary reading. Most of the computers I see turned on in lectures are either on a word processor or the relevant Wikipedia page. The lecturers know this, and will occasionally even ask for clarification of some insignificant yet interesting point (the date of an experiment or something along those lines). I see laptops, generally, as a positive addition to lecture halls.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that statistics from 2004 will be in any way relevant in 2010 when it comes numbers of computers? If so, I think you'll find you're a long, long way off the mark, my friend...
Using Tor gets around the filtering. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to change my ISP (living with my parents) so this is the best solution for now.
What about the gay victims? Or the ones with physical disabilities? Or the ones with learning difficulties (yes, you could argue that creationists have learning difficulties, but let's not go there). The holocaust wasn't just against Jewish people, it was against everyone except the perfect Aryans.
You could dial, while the phone is already next to your ear, dial without even looking at it, dial while looking at the screen (instead of it being covered by your finger) etc.
I can do all that on my N95, all through the magic of PHYSICAL BUTTONS! They're going to be the next revolution in communications, I assure you.
Sir, I have analysed your film, and must insist that you stop with these lies. There are not 725 different noises. There are merely 25 noises repeated 29 times!
With lies such as these, I am only left to ask: Are you a politician?
Yeah, really strange that only the rich parts of the world are good at a sport where a lot of money is required to compete at a high level...
Besides which, that only applies to the general classification. In the other competitions (sprints and King of the Mountains mostly), there's been a lot of winners from other parts of the world. For example, last year, Juan Mauricio Soler Hernandez, from Columbia, took the KOM. Robbie McEwan, from Australia, has won the sprint competition many times. The favourite for the overall competition this year is Cadel Evans, another Aussie.
Actually, atheism is the active belief in no god. Being agnostic means I believe nothing. I don't actively believe that there is no god, but I also don't actively believe that there is. I'm open to all possibilities, therefore I'm agnostic.
By the way, yes, you can apply what I said the anything you want. That's kind of the point. The basic point is that in each scenario, the 'god' says why something happens. Car - 'god' wants to go faster. Carrot - 'god' is hungry. Universe - 'god' was bored. Science tells us how it happened. By viewing it like that, there is no conflict between science and religion. However, this approach needs the teaching of proper science, not creationism. If you have a belief, you'll already go to a place of worship. That should provide your religious education, and any answers to the 'why' part. You should then go to school, and learn the science, the 'how'.
I really do feel sorry for you on this topic in the USA. Yes, our British government is appalling, we're having our rights stripped away at a terrifying rate, but at least our schools are still teaching the right stuff in the science classroom. Our science teaching is a very long way off perfect, but it's one hell of a lot better than this.
The thing that annoys me about this debate is that the existence, or even correctness, of either point of view does not make the other point of view wrong.
For an example, let's use a car analogy. You push down the accelerator, and the car goes faster. You made the car go faster. You are God.
When you pressed down the accelerator, you pulled a cable, or caused an electrical signal to be sent, which opened the throttle on the engine and caused the engine to do more work. The extra work was translated into more revolutions per second of the drive shaft, which goes through the gearbox and differential to cause the wheels to spin faster, thus propelling the car along faster. This is the mechanism by which the car is caused to go faster. This is science.
Now, apply the same idea to the creation of the world, and the evolution of life. God creates the mechanisms by which creation and evolution occur, then the mechanisms perform the task in hand. Neither works without the other, the same way that the car doesn't go anywhere until you press the accelerator.
Note: I don't believe in God. I'm completely agnostic. I believe in science above all else. However, I like to think I'm intelligent enough not to write off someone else's opinions just because they conflict with my own, especially when the two are not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, the loudest people who are opposed to the cooperation between science and religion tend to be the ones with the lower IQs.
The whole point of the Eee is its low cost and low weight. A touch screen would increase both, especially the cost. Asus aren't stupid. If they thought that adding a touch screen would generate more sales than it would cost, it would have a touch screen.
Slashdot Mirror
I fully sympathise with this viewpoint. Occasionally there will be someone playing a game on their laptop during lectures on my course (physics), and it is incredibly distracting. It's a challenge to concentrate on the quantum mechanics lecture being delivered when you have someone playing GTA in your eyeline, and these people should be shot. However, the number of people using their laptops for this is statistically insignificant when compared to the number of people using their computers for note taking or supplementary reading. Most of the computers I see turned on in lectures are either on a word processor or the relevant Wikipedia page. The lecturers know this, and will occasionally even ask for clarification of some insignificant yet interesting point (the date of an experiment or something along those lines). I see laptops, generally, as a positive addition to lecture halls.
Are you seriously trying to suggest that statistics from 2004 will be in any way relevant in 2010 when it comes numbers of computers? If so, I think you'll find you're a long, long way off the mark, my friend...
Technoviking's available, and they can surrender to him without looking too stupid.
Bushes give a 6+ cover save all the time.
That's what yo' momma said.
Agreed. You seem like a massive cock.
You just essentially described a T-Mobile G1.
We can have the email program have profiles too!
Pretty sure they already exist. They're called 'email addresses'.
My Mastercard ends in 49...
Using Tor gets around the filtering. Unfortunately I'm not in a position to change my ISP (living with my parents) so this is the best solution for now.
Modern Nokias (the N95 at least, as that's the only one I can check) have that feature too. It can be incredibly useful.
No captcha, no subscription. I guess my account's unique.
Easy - Viruses.
What about the gay victims? Or the ones with physical disabilities? Or the ones with learning difficulties (yes, you could argue that creationists have learning difficulties, but let's not go there). The holocaust wasn't just against Jewish people, it was against everyone except the perfect Aryans.
Anyone who thinks they understand it hasn't really grasped it at all. ;)
The standard browser is excellent. However, I prefer some of the zoom options in Opera, so that's what I use.
Opera on my N95.
No, you're an order of magnitude out. 4 million losses with a population of 60 million is 7%, which is frankly terrifying.
You could dial, while the phone is already next to your ear, dial without even looking at it, dial while looking at the screen (instead of it being covered by your finger) etc.
I can do all that on my N95, all through the magic of PHYSICAL BUTTONS! They're going to be the next revolution in communications, I assure you.
Sir, I have analysed your film, and must insist that you stop with these lies. There are not 725 different noises. There are merely 25 noises repeated 29 times!
With lies such as these, I am only left to ask: Are you a politician?
Yeah, really strange that only the rich parts of the world are good at a sport where a lot of money is required to compete at a high level...
Besides which, that only applies to the general classification. In the other competitions (sprints and King of the Mountains mostly), there's been a lot of winners from other parts of the world. For example, last year, Juan Mauricio Soler Hernandez, from Columbia, took the KOM. Robbie McEwan, from Australia, has won the sprint competition many times. The favourite for the overall competition this year is Cadel Evans, another Aussie.
Because "pages" are a great way to measure a specs size..
Exactly. How many Libraries of Congress is this?
Actually, atheism is the active belief in no god. Being agnostic means I believe nothing. I don't actively believe that there is no god, but I also don't actively believe that there is. I'm open to all possibilities, therefore I'm agnostic.
By the way, yes, you can apply what I said the anything you want. That's kind of the point. The basic point is that in each scenario, the 'god' says why something happens. Car - 'god' wants to go faster. Carrot - 'god' is hungry. Universe - 'god' was bored. Science tells us how it happened. By viewing it like that, there is no conflict between science and religion. However, this approach needs the teaching of proper science, not creationism. If you have a belief, you'll already go to a place of worship. That should provide your religious education, and any answers to the 'why' part. You should then go to school, and learn the science, the 'how'.
I really do feel sorry for you on this topic in the USA. Yes, our British government is appalling, we're having our rights stripped away at a terrifying rate, but at least our schools are still teaching the right stuff in the science classroom. Our science teaching is a very long way off perfect, but it's one hell of a lot better than this.
The thing that annoys me about this debate is that the existence, or even correctness, of either point of view does not make the other point of view wrong.
For an example, let's use a car analogy. You push down the accelerator, and the car goes faster. You made the car go faster. You are God.
When you pressed down the accelerator, you pulled a cable, or caused an electrical signal to be sent, which opened the throttle on the engine and caused the engine to do more work. The extra work was translated into more revolutions per second of the drive shaft, which goes through the gearbox and differential to cause the wheels to spin faster, thus propelling the car along faster. This is the mechanism by which the car is caused to go faster. This is science.
Now, apply the same idea to the creation of the world, and the evolution of life. God creates the mechanisms by which creation and evolution occur, then the mechanisms perform the task in hand. Neither works without the other, the same way that the car doesn't go anywhere until you press the accelerator.
Note: I don't believe in God. I'm completely agnostic. I believe in science above all else. However, I like to think I'm intelligent enough not to write off someone else's opinions just because they conflict with my own, especially when the two are not mutually exclusive. Unfortunately, the loudest people who are opposed to the cooperation between science and religion tend to be the ones with the lower IQs.
The whole point of the Eee is its low cost and low weight. A touch screen would increase both, especially the cost. Asus aren't stupid. If they thought that adding a touch screen would generate more sales than it would cost, it would have a touch screen.