There is no evidence God does not exist, just as there is no evidence he does exist; therefore, atheism requires just as much faith as any other religion.
It would, were atheism to be what you seem to think it is. Atheism is just a lack of theistic belief. It may or may not lead to a positive belief in the non-existence of a god, but it doesn't actually mandate one.
It's possible to be an open-minded atheist, you know; a talking, burning bush might change my mind, at least in principle.
When I buy a car I expect it to wear down and need repair from time to time. I do not expect the same of a right to watch a movie / listen to music / play a game.
Car manufacturers do not get anything on resells. Nobody should. First sale doctrine and all that. And yes, I know that publishers claim that they license a right to use software instead of selling that right. But I rather suspect that all falls over when you want to exchange a scratched CD/DVD; you'll have to pay for the license all over again.
Gitmo already tipped us off about that one. Just ask David Hicks, or, better still, have a listen to the complete fcking bogans who think that what was done to him was perfectly fine. You don't have to look too hard to find support for ex post facto legislation.
perhaps the easiest and best solution for all concerned is to whack on a modest per-GB tariff, similar to the Canadian levy on blank media, to be paid back to content producers.
What a horrible system that would be to administer. And expensive. It would totally root the small to micro producers. Not to mention that it would be grossly unfair to people who consume little or no content of the nature that this is aimed at. Spomeone else in the thread likened DRM to collective punishment; this idea is another way of collectively punishing people. "Controversial" probably isn't the right word here.
Whoops. You missed it. Imagine some SOB who stole "your" digital $200 digital cash for some drugs then the cops catch him with your money, traceable to you, on his iphone. Not good. Does that help?
So my smart phone stops being merely a piece of hardware that someone would like to lift out of my pocket to sell down at the pub, and starts being the keys to my bank account(s)? OK, maybe smart phone security can be beefed up, but I'm sure that might present additional challenges.
If enough of us use encrypted communications it'll stop being remarkable. Won't happen, though: there's too much what-have-you-got-to-hide "thinking" going on in the community here.
How would you like driving if every car...ever made was still on the roads? Sure, it's not so nice when you're the old thing that's getting cleared away.
I asked my car about that and it said nothing. If you were to ask me about it, then, unlike my car, I would have something to say. I learned a lot more than my car ever did. Your analogy doesn't convince me that my death is a good thing.
Remember, you aren't allowed to sing to yourself in a public place without paying a license fee - people have actually been threatened with lawsuits for doing so. They want control of the internet the same way, so fo instance, you can't make your own music or videos and post them for people to see unless you pay the media companies a license fee for doing that.
Slashdot Mirror
What I think I saw you do there was rename "objective truth" and "subjective truth".
It would, were atheism to be what you seem to think it is. Atheism is just a lack of theistic belief. It may or may not lead to a positive belief in the non-existence of a god, but it doesn't actually mandate one.
It's possible to be an open-minded atheist, you know; a talking, burning bush might change my mind, at least in principle.
Wait a minute... doesn't that restrict your Federal government and not your State governments?
When I buy a car I expect it to wear down and need repair from time to time. I do not expect the same of a right to watch a movie / listen to music / play a game.
Car manufacturers do not get anything on resells. Nobody should. First sale doctrine and all that. And yes, I know that publishers claim that they license a right to use software instead of selling that right. But I rather suspect that all falls over when you want to exchange a scratched CD/DVD; you'll have to pay for the license all over again.
And how is "I know that doing this job is going to piss people off, but I choose nevertheless to do it" not the thinking of a selfish prick?
Gitmo already tipped us off about that one. Just ask David Hicks, or, better still, have a listen to the complete fcking bogans who think that what was done to him was perfectly fine. You don't have to look too hard to find support for ex post facto legislation.
What a horrible system that would be to administer. And expensive. It would totally root the small to micro producers. Not to mention that it would be grossly unfair to people who consume little or no content of the nature that this is aimed at. Spomeone else in the thread likened DRM to collective punishment; this idea is another way of collectively punishing people. "Controversial" probably isn't the right word here.
Yes, but they're still two different things. One being a prerequisite for the other doesn't make the two the same.
If the dinosaurs had dug up the countryside and dumped arse-loads of rubbish into landfill you might have had a point.
Those who collect it are those who give it value.
Whoops. You missed it. Imagine some SOB who stole "your" digital $200 digital cash for some drugs then the cops catch him with your money, traceable to you, on his iphone. Not good. Does that help?
Or centi-Newtons.
So my smart phone stops being merely a piece of hardware that someone would like to lift out of my pocket to sell down at the pub, and starts being the keys to my bank account(s)? OK, maybe smart phone security can be beefed up, but I'm sure that might present additional challenges.
We don't have an Adelaide airport in Sydney. We have a Sydney airport here and it's a pain in the arse.
Too damn right. If you didn't see its launch, then you're fucked. It's never where it was when you saw it.
Or better still: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Killing_Star
There is no stealth in space, unless you like your space vehicles to radiate at about 3deg K or whatever the background temperature is.
If enough of us use encrypted communications it'll stop being remarkable. Won't happen, though: there's too much what-have-you-got-to-hide "thinking" going on in the community here.
Not to mention the braid-pulling...
This is for and because of voting as if there were only two parties in the country.
I asked my car about that and it said nothing. If you were to ask me about it, then, unlike my car, I would have something to say. I learned a lot more than my car ever did. Your analogy doesn't convince me that my death is a good thing.
You were expecting, maybe, Chetter Hummin?
[citation needed]
So we need an inclusive definition rather than an exclusive definition?
Because in principle we may be able to do better than that? Just asking.